Sadly, I found that this film seriously outstayed its interest; it starts off well with an intriguing concept, that of the lone survivor in a mysteriously abandoned city, and develops this into a socio-comic commentary on the worthlessness of money and valuables in unlimited supply, compared to the real necessities of life. The handful of survivors who find each other become bored of their effortless scroungers' existence and start quarrelling among themselves -- saved only by the arrival of the long-awaited signal from the outside world.
Thus far, thus John Wyndham (there are strong parallels here with the novel "The Day of the Triffids"). This silent film is somewhat heavy on its use of intertitles (which do inevitably suffer in translation), is not especially distinguished in its acting and as a comedy not particularly funny. But, having explained away preceding events by invoking a mad professor and then wound up his story by an 'and then they all went back to their previous lives' scene, the film-maker then commits the cardinal error of pressing the reset button -- or in this case, throwing the freeze-ray switch yet again. And again.
We get a whole new segment of story driven by the financial travails of only two of the previous five characters, who can't face being poor after having had the whole city to glean from and decide to freeze everybody again so that they can rob them. Only the professor notices, so he reverses the switch yet again... demonstrates to his disbelieving colleague, jerking everybody on and off... the world 'compensates' by being cranked extra fast, Keystone-fashion... and the whole thing descends into slapdash tedium of a fairly primitive kind, which has ceased some time earlier to be entertaining. More or less the entirety of the second half of the film could have been cut (from the young couple parting outside the Eiffel Tower straight to the finding of the ring), and only to its improvement.
This film was shown in a double-bill with Buster Keaton's "Three Ages", a film shot in the same year and similarly using camera trickery (what must be one of the earliest animated cartoon sequences featuring a live actor). The comparison was not at all to the favour of "Paris qui dort", alas, which dragged terribly and came across as much more wordy and primitive; it's not entirely fair to judge it against an action comedy, but it is in the frenetic action sequences that this film is the weakest. One gets the impression that the director had just run out of ideas. By the ending of the film I was seriously bored; the Keaton, despite a poor print, woke up the audience (in at least one case, literally) like a shot.
Thus far, thus John Wyndham (there are strong parallels here with the novel "The Day of the Triffids"). This silent film is somewhat heavy on its use of intertitles (which do inevitably suffer in translation), is not especially distinguished in its acting and as a comedy not particularly funny. But, having explained away preceding events by invoking a mad professor and then wound up his story by an 'and then they all went back to their previous lives' scene, the film-maker then commits the cardinal error of pressing the reset button -- or in this case, throwing the freeze-ray switch yet again. And again.
We get a whole new segment of story driven by the financial travails of only two of the previous five characters, who can't face being poor after having had the whole city to glean from and decide to freeze everybody again so that they can rob them. Only the professor notices, so he reverses the switch yet again... demonstrates to his disbelieving colleague, jerking everybody on and off... the world 'compensates' by being cranked extra fast, Keystone-fashion... and the whole thing descends into slapdash tedium of a fairly primitive kind, which has ceased some time earlier to be entertaining. More or less the entirety of the second half of the film could have been cut (from the young couple parting outside the Eiffel Tower straight to the finding of the ring), and only to its improvement.
This film was shown in a double-bill with Buster Keaton's "Three Ages", a film shot in the same year and similarly using camera trickery (what must be one of the earliest animated cartoon sequences featuring a live actor). The comparison was not at all to the favour of "Paris qui dort", alas, which dragged terribly and came across as much more wordy and primitive; it's not entirely fair to judge it against an action comedy, but it is in the frenetic action sequences that this film is the weakest. One gets the impression that the director had just run out of ideas. By the ending of the film I was seriously bored; the Keaton, despite a poor print, woke up the audience (in at least one case, literally) like a shot.