"Metropolis" is, if nothing else, one of the most spectacular visual movies I've ever seen. Reportedly the most expensive German movie up to that time, Fritz Lang created an awesome city, totally memorable. I was lucky enough to see the restored version of the film -- listed as being 124 minutes, seeming like less -- in the theater with a group of about 70 people. Everyone seemed to enjoy the 75 year-old beast. (There was some clapping at the end -- a tradition that has always perplexed me. I mean, it's not like Fritz and his crew, or even those responsible for the wonderful restoration, are around to bask in the applause. Although, I guess, the applause was meant more for the theater that opted to bring the film here.)
This is definitely one for the big screen.
The story is heavy-handed by today's standards, but putting myself in the shoes of what I imagine the average audience of the time would have been like made me appreciate the ideas of the film more. (By no means, however, am I suggesting that a 1927 audience was less educated than we. They just didn't have the extra 75 years of movies we do.)
The subterranean workers of the great city threaten to overthrow its rulers, led by Joh Fredersen. Now, Joh's son, Freder, sees an angel of a girl, Maria, who shows him his "brothers" and the terrible conditions of his father's workers. Maria captivates Freder, and she preaches the message of love and peace. The film's message, stated through her, is that the mediator of the hand (workers) and the mind (leader) is the heart (Maria and Freder).
Freder goes below, to the "depths," where he poses as a worker. He discovers plans for a revolt (more like a strike) where the workers will leave their machines in the hopes of being granted better conditions.
But things get more complicated when Joh Fredersen has his scientist, Rotwang, who lives in an old barn-like house that the technical revolutions of the future have forgotten, design something for him. Rotwang has already created a machine man, modeled after Joh Fredersen's dead wife Hel (a sort of "replacement"), but Joh Fredersen has him affix Maria's face to the machine. Joh plans to use this machine to incite the workers to violence, by having her first get the workers' attention by doing a (not so) sexy gyspy dance. Of course they do, and the city is flooded. The moral at the end of the film is silly, but because the whole film is so unrealistic, so much like a fable, it didn't bother me. (I did, however, lean over to my friend and say in a Fred Rogers voice, "Won't you be my mediator?")
There really isn't much else you can say about "Metropolis." Those images are why you'd see this movie. The way it reflects (or maybe warns against) Nazi totalitarianism is interesting. (One image, in particular, where a machine explodes and turns into a giant devourer, has an unsettling similarity to gas chamber.) I like that Lang was interested both in the ideals of Freder and Maria, but also in a sense of order. With the uprising that does occur, of course, there are repercussions. The dialogues (or title cards) in the film express a protest of the sort of dictating aristocracy of Metropolis, but Lang's own spectacular sets and monumental vision seem to argue with that.
The sets and the images (including two memorable camera moves) just can't be overemphasized. Sometimes they look like models or Styrofoam or just plain goofy, but they're incredible and original and influential. Many a homage has been paid to this film, from "Dr. Strangelove" to more of a blatant rip-off in "The Fifth Element."
This is a vastly entertaining movie, made no less enjoyable by its sometimes silly premise. (It's not as if the acting in silent movies isn't wildly exaggerated -- and isn't that the appeal in the first place?) I'm completely ignorant when it comes to Lang -- this is the first movie of his I've seen. Nevertheless, this is a masterwork.
****
This is definitely one for the big screen.
The story is heavy-handed by today's standards, but putting myself in the shoes of what I imagine the average audience of the time would have been like made me appreciate the ideas of the film more. (By no means, however, am I suggesting that a 1927 audience was less educated than we. They just didn't have the extra 75 years of movies we do.)
The subterranean workers of the great city threaten to overthrow its rulers, led by Joh Fredersen. Now, Joh's son, Freder, sees an angel of a girl, Maria, who shows him his "brothers" and the terrible conditions of his father's workers. Maria captivates Freder, and she preaches the message of love and peace. The film's message, stated through her, is that the mediator of the hand (workers) and the mind (leader) is the heart (Maria and Freder).
Freder goes below, to the "depths," where he poses as a worker. He discovers plans for a revolt (more like a strike) where the workers will leave their machines in the hopes of being granted better conditions.
But things get more complicated when Joh Fredersen has his scientist, Rotwang, who lives in an old barn-like house that the technical revolutions of the future have forgotten, design something for him. Rotwang has already created a machine man, modeled after Joh Fredersen's dead wife Hel (a sort of "replacement"), but Joh Fredersen has him affix Maria's face to the machine. Joh plans to use this machine to incite the workers to violence, by having her first get the workers' attention by doing a (not so) sexy gyspy dance. Of course they do, and the city is flooded. The moral at the end of the film is silly, but because the whole film is so unrealistic, so much like a fable, it didn't bother me. (I did, however, lean over to my friend and say in a Fred Rogers voice, "Won't you be my mediator?")
There really isn't much else you can say about "Metropolis." Those images are why you'd see this movie. The way it reflects (or maybe warns against) Nazi totalitarianism is interesting. (One image, in particular, where a machine explodes and turns into a giant devourer, has an unsettling similarity to gas chamber.) I like that Lang was interested both in the ideals of Freder and Maria, but also in a sense of order. With the uprising that does occur, of course, there are repercussions. The dialogues (or title cards) in the film express a protest of the sort of dictating aristocracy of Metropolis, but Lang's own spectacular sets and monumental vision seem to argue with that.
The sets and the images (including two memorable camera moves) just can't be overemphasized. Sometimes they look like models or Styrofoam or just plain goofy, but they're incredible and original and influential. Many a homage has been paid to this film, from "Dr. Strangelove" to more of a blatant rip-off in "The Fifth Element."
This is a vastly entertaining movie, made no less enjoyable by its sometimes silly premise. (It's not as if the acting in silent movies isn't wildly exaggerated -- and isn't that the appeal in the first place?) I'm completely ignorant when it comes to Lang -- this is the first movie of his I've seen. Nevertheless, this is a masterwork.
****