[Note: I usually post my “In The Spotlight” conversations on Sunday morning, but due to scheduling conflict…I had to post my conversation with my special guest Gil Anderson, this morning. I hope that you enjoy what my guest Gilchrist Anderson, has to say in our interview about his painstaking restoration of Giorgio Moroder’s version of director Fritz Lang’s 1927 film Metropolis
Thanks,]
Good-Morning… Wonders in the Dark readers, and fellow bloggers, this morning I am so happy that film editor Gilchrist Anderson, took the time out of his very busy schedule to sit down and discuss with me over a cup of coffee and croissant(s) his restoration of Giorgio Moroder’s version of director Fritz Lang’s 1927 film Metropolis.
Dee Dee:
Good-morning…Gil Anderson, what a pleasure it is for me to meet you, (as I reach to shake Gil Anderson’s hand) please sit down.
Dee Dee:
Let me begin by asking you the first question that I ask all my guest and that is…
Can you once again please tell me (and the Wonders in the Dark readers,) a little about your blog? Metropolis Redux
Gilchrist Anderson:
My blog chronicles the last part of my journey in re-creating Metropolis Redux, Giorgio Moroder’s version of Metropolis.
I never really planned on making the work public, but there was so much interest I thought I’d better share and started documenting what I was doing.
DeeDee:
I would have to say that was a very wise decision…sharing your work with the public.
DeeDee:
Gil, let me start by asking you a little about your background…Where are you from?
Gilchrist Anderson:
I’m originally from the UK – hence my spelling preferences. I currently live in New zealand. Probably most popularly known right now for producing the Flight Of Concords. I started doing comedy the same year as Reece Darby, in fact. It is very weird to see him all over the place on TV and film now … how is that for name dropping?
DeeDee:
Ur…Hmm.. er…Unfortunately, I’am not familiar with comedian Reece Darby…and I most definitely, didn’t know that comedy was in your background…Like myself, I just thought that you had a wonderful sense of humour… Know wonder I found myself giggling at some of your responses.”
DeeDee:
What qualifications did you achieve before you got where you are today? In other words, what is your educational background?
Gilchrist Anderson:
I’ve got bachelors and masters degrees in computer science. After I got my bachelor’s degree I hadn’t decided what to do yet, so I did my masters. I might have gone on to do a doctorate but I got offered work doing internet stuff, right when they were busy inventing the web.
DeeDee:
Oh! that sounds great…perfect timing I would say…
DeeDee:
Gil, can you, please tell me a little about your professional background…and what tools that you use to restore Moroder’s version of director Fritz Lang’s 1927 film Metropolis.
Gilchrist Anderson:
I do a little bit of everything media related. Audio, images and video … you name it! Yes, I am a media whore!
DeeDee
(Giggling)
Gilchrist Anderson:
I also do online marketing and can let you in on a secret – there are NO get rich quick schemes on the web … unless you happen to be selling get rich quick schemes.
What was the other question?
DeeDee:
What tools did you use? (Giggling)
Gilchrist:
Ah … I use Macintoshes, so the tools I used for my restoration edit were Final Cut Pro for editing, DVD Studio Pro to create the DVD masters and Audacity – or occasionally Soundtrack Pro – for audio work. Photoshop and Illustrator were used for the graphics and DVD cover.
DeeDee:
Wow…
DeeDee:
What have you learned about editing that they do not tell you in film school?
Gilchrist Anderson:
Everything. Particularly as I didn’t go to film school! As something of a perfectionist I would say that editing always takes me much longer that I thought it would. That’s why I love a quote I originally heard via Peter Jackson – “Films aren’t released, they escape.”
DeeDee:
Why did you decide to edit Giorgio Moroder’s Metropolis?
Gilchrist Anderson:
It seemed like a good idea at the time. Ah, such innocent times. Now I’ve created a monster!
DeeDee
(Smiling)
Gilchrist Anderson:
I was aware of Metropolis from books as a kid, but had never seen it until I caught the Giorgio Moroder version on TV one Sunday afternoon in the late 80s. I managed to tape most of it and loved it. I’m a Queen/Freddie Mercury fan, so that helped.
After seeing the 2001 Murnau Stiftung restoration in a cinema I thought “wouldn’t it be nice to see Moroder’s version looking so clean and clear”. Compared to what I was used to – poor image quality and crummy mono sound – the 2001 version was like watching a film that had been made almost yesterday.
[Note:If you haven’t already…check out the restoration of Kino’s version here at their website.]
The Restoration of Metropolis…Over Their at Kino’s Website (Thanks, kelly)…
In about 2007 I needed to retired Abode Premiere that I had previously used for video editing and had to get into Final Cut Pro. Re-editing Metropolis seemed like a good idea as a training project. I checked online in 2007 and saw that others also had the same idea – and had actually started their work.
Then I thought “what the heck” and started doing it anyway. Final Cut Pro has quite a learning curve but I can now do things with it that you probably should be doing.
DeeDee:
Oh! yes, that is technology for you…always evolving!
DeeDee:
How long did it take you to complete your restoration of Metropolis?
Gilchrist Anderson:
About 2 years until I was happy enough with what I’d done for others to see it in early 2009. But the job was squeezed in between work, family and life in general.
It’s the usual case: If I’d known then what I knew now, I’d never have started it. As far as I know, I was the first to finish a re-edit. I know of two others now, but mine seems to be the best and most meticulously re-created.
Did I say that previously how it is interesting how different people approach a problem?
DeeDee:
Hmmm…I think so, but for the benefit of the Wonders in the Dark readers, maybe you want to repeat how you approached or resolved the problem.
Gilchrist Anderson:
When I first thought about doing this, I saw that there was a petition online to get Moroder to release his version on DVD. That petition is still going but after years and years I don’t think they are any closer to getting Moroder releasing his version.
My solution to the ‘problem’ was to do a restoration myself. Turned out faster in the long run – and on my main website I say something like: Even if they did release Moroder’s version on DVD, it would still be the same bad quality as it was then. Who would be crazy enough to re-edit the whole movie with restored footage?
Oh, wait. That would be me!
DeeDee:
(Giggling)
DeeDee:
Gil, do you consider yourself a film editor? Filmmaker, etc, etc, etc,
Gilchrist Anderson:
In a roundabout way, I guess I am a film editor in this case, as I did not shoot any footage, just re-worked what was in the public domain. I did create a number of new elements for this edit though.
This is the biggest project like this I’ve every worked on. I’ve produced shorter comedy sketches, edited live shows and training videos but nothing in the 90 minutes mark before.
DeeDee:
What is it like being a film editor?
Gilchrist Anderson:
The project seemed to irritate my wife somewhat. My experience was unusual in that I was doing this as a personal project. It was a challenge to just find half an hour here and there where I could sit down and do a bit more on it. It was probably best that way, as some of the rotorscoping and compositing I had to do was mind-numbingly boring. I think it almost became a warped zen thing!
When it got to the point where I was ready to tear my face off or too much drool had pooled in the keyboard, I generally had to go and do some ‘real’ work or change a nappy or something else.
DeeDee:
(Giggling)
DeeDee:
Have you, always wanted to be a film editor?
Gilchrist Anderson:
Not really, to be honest. Normally I would rather be doing the conceptual, creative writing aspects and leave the nuts and bolts construction to people who actually know what they’re doing … and can do it a lot faster than me.
DeeDee:
Do you enjoy what you do?
Gilchrist Anderson:
Overall it was fun to do. I’am very happy to have been able to bring Moroder’s version of Metropolis back to life and in a state ready for the 21st century. The feedback I’ve had on Metropolis Redux is amazing. I’ve got pages and pages of people raving about it.
Gilchrist Anderson’s raving customers…I hope to be one too!
[Note:I have read the reviews and I’am quite sure that after I watch the film my name could easily be added to the testimonials.]
Gilchrist Anderson:
It’s a shame that Murnau Stiftung, who own the European copyright of Metropolis, don’t seem to like Giorgio’s version. Arguably, if it hadn’t been for Moroder making a general release of the film in the 80s, Metropolis would never have been so popular as it is now.
DeeDee:
Isn’t Metropolis well out of copyright?
Gilchrist Anderson:
Mostly … different countries have different copyright laws. Metropolis will be in copyright in Europe until 2025. In the US and most of the rest of the world, it’s well out of copyright. That’s why there are so many versions of Metropolis out there. So many bad versions.
There was an attempt to re-copyright Metropolis and some other old films. In fact they were re-copyrighted for a little while until the supreme court didn’t uphold the “Golan vs. Holder” case as it violated the first amendment. They basically said you can’t re-copyright something that has already been in the public domain.
DeeDee:
What was the most difficult part of editing Moroder’s version of Metropolis?
Gilchrist Anderson:
The variations in footage were a pain. Much of the best footage is actually from different takes or slightly different angles from the shots available to Moroder. I had to do a fair amount of fiddling in some cases to make things work. Moroder also removed the inter-titles, which meant some jump cuts when the footage was spliced back together.
Another difficult part was more conceptual. I was trying to create a faithful re-creation of Moroder’s edit but also I wanted to create the film he might have made if he’d had the film and tools available today. I’ve been very careful about what extra SFX or tints I added.
One thing I always knew I was going to do was in the robot transformation scene. It had always bugged me that when the robot head transformed into Maria’s, the eyes didn’t line up, so the fade didn’t quite work for me. I split that clip into separate elements and composited it back again with the eyes lining up. It also made it easier to add Moroder’s purple rings too.
Of course, if I hadn’t mentioned it, you probably would never have noticed. You can see my version of this clip here:
Another difficulty was my hard drive crash about a year into the restoration but I don’t really want to talk about that. That’s something for my therapist.
DeeDee:
(Laughter…I really respect the British “sense of humour.”)
DeeDee:
What scenes would you say you are particularly proud of and how did you cut or edit the scene(s)?
Gilchrist Anderson:
I think the robot transformation scene is my favourite – partly by what I didn’t do. I would have been so easy to go crazy with extra SFX and tints and other junk and diverge from what Moroder wanted to portray. I think I’ve walked the line well. There are a few extras like the head to robot fade we talked about before but I’ve tried to be a subtle as possible.
To re-create the film, I loaded Moroder’s version into a background video track and then built the new version of the film on top of that using it as reference. I’d describe what I’ve done as a shot-for-shot recreation of Moroder’s work. There are some variations but generally the edits happen within a few frames of the original.
DeeDee:
I know that you already mentioned that would be a Herculean task to restore the 25 missing minutes on your restored version…but do you actually, think that you will ever add the additional 25 missing minutes to your version of Moroder’s films?
Gilchrist Anderson:
My initial goal was simply to try and re-create Moroder’s version to put on DVD. This was before the extra 25 minutes had even been found in Argentina. I’ve seen the new ‘complete’ version of the film and the lost scenes do add a lot back to the story of the film.
My dilemma is that those scenes were never in the Moroder version, so if I did add them back in I wouldn’t actually have Moroder’s version anymore. Also, I’d have to find new music for those scenes and the quality of the ‘lost’ film is pretty dreadful – even after being restored. You can certainly see where the extra film has been added in.
Ironically, adding the colour tints when doing a Moroder version would probably hide the difference in quality better.
Many people also ask if I’d thought of doing an HD version. I’m not convinced that there’s anything to be gained from this. The restored film is still pretty darned grainy and noisy, so all an HD version would do is even more accurately reproduce that noise.
So I don’t know about the extra film. I’m still undecided. Right now I’m just trying to get version 2 of the DVD released with a restored trailer and new original music video. You can see the trailer here:
DeeDee:
Gil Anderson,
Thank-you, for giving Sam Juliano and me copies of your restored version of Moroder’s version of director Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and for being a very patience and most gracious guest.
Gil Anderson:
My pleasure. Thanks for listening to my ramblings.
DeeDee:
Gil Anderson, from over there at Metropolis Redux
I want to thank-you, for stopping by and sharing some of your time with the readers and me… here at Wonders in the Dark in order to discuss your restoration of Giorgio Moroder’s version of director Fritz Lang’s 1927 film Metropolis.
[Note:In honour of Gilchrist Anderson, being my “special guest” this month…I like to take the time to announce that I plan to give away a copy of his version of Giorgio Moroder’s version of Metropolis in an upcoming contest. I will make an official announcement next week.
Thank-you,]
Click on names for archives
Writers/Founders
Wonders in the Dark 
I think you guys have lost your screen caps. They aren’t showing up at this site.
Sounds like Mr. Anderson is a talented guy, and a very busy one to boot. This was quite a project, and congratulations on the glowing success of it.
I have to agree with you that an HD version would only make the flaws more visible. I also believe the robot transformation scene to be the most dazzling in the film.
Is this version completely different than the one that will show in theatres in May?
Yes, it will only be around 85m – I watched it once on Channel 4 and nearly threw up at the inappropriateness of the music. Get the 145m restoration later in the year.
As I have stated before I am against in every way shape or form the promotion of any version that is not the complete version. It’s like applauding Coppola’s Napoleon in my eyes.
Regardless Allan, this is still a valid artistic interpretation and as such I respect it.
Interesting to note that even the ‘complete’ version which came out this year is STILL missing footage that was in the original release in 1927. Some of the recently found footage was just too damaged to use and other parts were only ever in the very first release in Germany. I doubt copies of them will ever be found.
That being the case, I guess you’d be against the promotion of any version of Metropolis available now.
Gilchrist, you make an excellent point here.
Moroder’s version of Metropolis is based on the best footage that was available in 1984. Huge parts of the film are virtually identical to the Kino and ‘Complete’ version coming out soon (such as the robot transformation and finale).
Joe said,”Is this version completely different than the one that will show in theatres in May?”
Hi! Joe,
This version is the version of Metropolis…before the 25 additional missing minutes in Argentina were found…By the way, I have already emailed Gilchrist Anderson, and I have asked him if possible can he please stop by and answer questions that I’am unable to response to…
…Thank-you,
DeeDee 😉
No it isn’t. Moroder’s version was only ever around 85m. The full cut prior to the footage discovery was around 115m. The restoration is 145m.
The restoration can only be to take the better quality footage of the 115m version and replace the corresponding scenes of the Moroder version with the cleaner print. It can only run to the original 85m as there’s no Moroder music to go with the rest. I applaud Mr Anderson’s efforts for those minority who like the Moroder version, release, let us not forget, when virtually no version was available, but I still cannot advise anyone to see it for anything other than curiosity value.
“I applaud Mr Anderson’s efforts for those minority who like the Moroder version, release, let us not forget, when virtually no version was available, but I still cannot advise anyone to see it for anything other than curiosity value.”
Fair enough Allan, but above all Gilcrest Anderson has worked hard and long to bring out a vastly improved print before the new footage and the enhancements were added.
But it was still only of the 85m version. It’s for geeks of Moroder’s electric score and not for anyone with an interest in metropolis…
Maybe finding out which version people prefer would be a good Pop Quiz? Given the number of people who I’ve been in contact with regarding Metropolis, the Moroder version doesn’t seem like having minority status 🙂
Indeed Gilchrist, I’m with you there. This version has a passionate following, and the last think we want to do is approach this as an elitist.
Gilchrist Anderson said,”Another difficult part was more conceptual. I was trying to create a faithful re-creation of Moroder’s edit but also I wanted to create the film he might have made if he’d had the film and tools available today. I’ve been very careful about what extra SFX or tints I added…”
Personally, I don’t think that Gilchrist Anderson, is focusing so much on Fritz Lang’s 1927 masterpiece instead, I think that his main focus was to re-create Moroder’s version to put on DVD and basically to walk if you will…in Moroder’s shoes and not director Fritz Lang’s shoes.…
…I think that his reason for restoring Moroder’s version was to see what his work would have looked like if he (Moroder) had the technology today at hand…back when he (Moroder) created his version of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis.
DeeDee 😉
“I think that his reason for restoring Moroder’s version was to see what his work would have looked like if he (Moroder) had the technology today at hand…back when he (Moroder) created his version of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis.”
Precisely, Dee Dee!
Don’t forget that Moroder himself was trying to recreate and restore what Fritz Lang had ORIGINALLY created. Putting the modern score and music aside, Moroder tried to re-create Lang’s original story-line as best he could. This had pretty much been lost since the heavily edited and re-written ‘American’ version became the most common version to be found and seen.
Allan said, “No it isn’t. Moroder’s version was only ever around 85m. The full cut prior to the footage discovery was around 115m. The restoration is 145m.”
Hi! Allan,
First of all, thanks, for the correction, (when it comes to the length of each film) but I’am not familiar with Moroder,(Oops! I meant to say I wasn’t familiar with Moroder, until this year too!) or the length of his film…As a matter of fact, I just watched Lang’s Metropolis for the first-time this year…
…I know, I know, ignorance is no excuse, but I never watched Moroder’s version or Lang’s version well, not until this year…Therefore, I would never noticed the length of their films…Hence, the reason that I said, this in my previous comment…
…”By the way, I have already emailed Gilchrist Anderson, and have asked him if possible can he stop by and answer questions that I’am unable to response…”
DeeDee 😉
I hesitate to mention this as it might open a another can of worms, but even the full running time of the original Metropolis (and subsequent versions) is debatable. Metropolis was made before film speeds were standardised at 24 frames per second.
Some people claim that the Metropolis films should be played at around 18-20 fps, others 22 fps and still other 24 fps. There is no record of what Lang’s ideal speed was.
The latest release of Metropolis runs at 24 fps which, I have to admit, makes some of the action and movement look a bit cartoonish. Check out Freder’s running as he leaves his Father’s office to chase Josephat.
I found while restoring Moroder’s version that I had to slow much of the 24 fps footage down to about 20 fps. For a quick comparison, watch my restored Freddie Mercury Love Kills music video (24 fps) and then see my restored movie clips (18-24 fps).
Although the slower frame rate made the Moroder version longer than others with similar content, the removal of the dialogue inter-titles (and replacement with sub-titles) shortened the film back down considerably.
This is a wonderful interview that confirms the self-sacrifice that was accomplished over a period of two years. It was most interesting to know that you completed the restoration yourself. I look forward to both versions.
I couldn’t agree with you more Peter.
A tremendous interview!
Great questions by Dee Dee; fascinating responses from Gilchrist Anderson.
One question Dee Dee–is “The Flight of Concords” that Mr. Anderson produced, the famous New Zealand television show, available on netflix?
Indeed Dee Dee and Fred, THE FLIGHT OF THE CONCORDS is available from netflix!!!
I believe The Flight Of Concords screened originally on MTV.
An excellent read and look forward to watching again, without german subtitles ; )
Was fantastic and the clarity amazing………
Thanks, as always ; )
Frederick said,”One question Dee Dee–is “The Flight of Concords” that Mr. Anderson produced, the famous New Zealand television show, available on netflix?”
Hi! Frederick,
I’am not familiar with the television show “The Flight of the Concords” and I’am not a betting person, but I’am betting ten to one that it is the “famous” New Zealand television show.
Frederick, I don’t have a netflix account, but I do have a Classicflix
account…Which I just checked out and “The Flight of the Concords” isn’t available over there on Classicflix.
Maybe Sam Juliano, can check over their on netflix for you…Frederick,
Thanks, for the comment, compliment and question.
DeeDee 😉
Hi! C.M.,
Thank-you, very much…for leaving a comment and compliment too!
…(addedum:) C.M., I must agree with you, the picture clarity is amazing.
DeeDee 😉
Mr. Anderson says:
“It seemed like a good idea at the time. Ah, such innocent times. Now I’ve created a monster!”
It’s this kind of humility that makes the work here a labor of love. Wonderful interview.
Hi! Sam Juliano, Allan and WitD readers,
@ Thanks, Karen…
@ Sam Juliano, Thanks for answering Frederick’s question for me…
@ Gilchrist said,”Metropolis was made before film speeds were standardised at 24 frames per second.
Some people claim that the Metropolis films should be played at around 18-20 fps, others 22 fps and still other 24 fps. There is no record of what Lang’s ideal speed was.
The latest release of Metropolis runs at 24 fps which, I have to admit, makes some of the action and movement look a bit cartoonish. Check out Freder’s running as he leaves his Father’s office to chase Josephat…”
@ Gilchrist, Thanks for sharing all the information about film speed and pointing out the different in length when the dialogue inter-titles (are replacement with sub-titles) …with the readers here at WitD and “especially” with me!
DeeDee 😉 🙂
Hi! Sam Juliano, Allan, D.H. Schleicher, Gil Anderson and Wonders in the Dark readers…How very apropos…
…Here Goes information about the screening of Fritz Lang’s 1927 film Metropolis.
Screening for Fritz Lang’s Metropolis Take Place in New York on May 07, thru May 20, 2010
Metropolis Trailer
[Note:If you haven’t already…check out the restoration of Kino’s version here at their website.]
The Restoration of Metropolis…Over Their at Kino’s Website (Thanks, kelly)…
Sam, I’am quite sure that you are aware of this news already…if I recall correctly…I think that you mentioned that you are a member of the Film Forum. 🙄
DeeDee 😉 🙂
Thanks so much Dee Dee for posting this link! Yes indeed, I do know of this run at the Film Forum, and I’ll surely be in attendance, and have a full report here!
Fabulous interview! Mr. Anderson, I am curious. Wil you be checking out the new restored version of Metropolis in a movie theatre, and if so what will you specifically be looking for?
Hi Ricky – Yes I’ll check the latest version out at a cinema… when it come to one near me.
From books and articles (and Moroder’s version) I knew that a major missing story portion was the adventures of Georg 11811. Freder asked him to go to his apartment and wait but he ended up at the Yoshiwara nightclub. the found footage does tell more of his story but it’s more him getting to Yoshiwara and what happens after. There’s almost nothing about him in the place!
I also knew the Thin Man story had been stripped out and he has two large scenes with Georg and Josaphat restored.
Ooh, yes, there’s also a little bit more added when Fredersen first meets with Rotwang and we finally see the Hel stature and their extended conversation.
There’s a whole sequence of Freder, Jospahat and Maria trying to rescue the children from the flooding and being trapped behind a locked door.
The end quarter of the film doesn’t have too much added – probably because they were more action oriented to start with and not so edited.