Michael_Elliott Twenty-Four Dollar Island, The (1927) *** (out of 4) The title to this Robert Flaherty short refers to the amount paid to the Indians by the Dutch to purchase what is now Manhattan. This here certainly isn't a typical documentary as a title card explains, the point of this film is to see how much the land has changed over the years from the time the Dutch were living on the island compared to the over 8-million living there in 1926. The documentary tells us that machinery and buildings have overtaken and perhaps overpowered actual people as we see these items at work. We see cranes being used to break into the ground and remove dirt. We see skyscrapers being erected as large boats make smaller boats look as if they're not there. The film gives a glimpses of what Manhattan looked like in 1926 as well as shows you the city continuing the get bigger and stronger. This film certainly isn't as great as MANHATTA but Flaherty does a nice job with the cinematography and it's for certain that his images never get you bored or turned off. At just over ten-minutes you see this footage of the city going up and it's done in a stylish way and a way that at least keeps the film moving at a nice pace.

gmwhite The title of this film refers to Manhattan, bought by Dutch colonists from local Indians for that price. By 1925, on the 300th anniversary of its purchase, needless to say, it had altered considerably, and in this film the viewer is offered a vision of contemporary Manhattan, with awesome cityscapes and busy waterways. In this, it is quite similar to many other 'city view' films.Personally, I found it as engaging as a similar film 'Manhatta', though its style was a little different. A better range of city sights was shown than in Manhatta, without such attention to style as the former.Incidentally, the director and photographer of this film, Robert Flaherty, also worked on the early documentary 'Nanook of the North', 'Man of Aran', and worked with Murnau on his 'Tabu of the South Seas'.I quite enjoyed this one. There was plenty to look at for those curious about big city life in the early 1900, but without the overt artistic pretensions of other such films, and without the one-sided attention to a singular aspect of a city, such as in 'Skyscraper Symphony'. Which is not to say that it is entirely artless, but rather that it allows the city itself to emerge as the main 'actor' in the film, unimpeded by snazzy editing or other more 'cinematic' effects.