For too long, film history has said, “Ah, Greed-the classic lost masterpiece, the emblematic instance of a crass studio trampling on artistry.” But, even at two hours plus (a shadow of its original self), Erich von Stroheim's Greed is still a thunderous experience and a great picture. Did the famously ironic “Von” really believe in a ten-hour version? Do we want movies that long? Is anything missing (from the Frank Norris original, McTeague) except more of the same? Was this even a sardonic attempt to make a “lost” film-inasmuch as lost films or coming attractions, or dreams over the rainbow, stir us the most? Meanwhile, consider this: that a big picture in 1924 could be called “Greed,” like an arresting and questioning slap in the face. Greed, the film, is good-it's great. And greed, the quality? What do the movies tell us about that deadly sin?