Critical Review of Metropolis - Essay Example

Critical Review of “Metropolis” Metropolis by Fritz Lang and his wife Thea von Harbou is one of the most important, innovative, and visionary movies in the history of world cinema. In fact, it is not just a film but, taking in consideration its visual effects and deep motives, a phenomenon. Everything in this movie appears to be epic and colossal, making the viewer feel shocked and anxious at the same time. Anxious because of timely and up-to-date problems which this movie shows. Metropolis is also an enigmatic and mysterious film because it depicts human problems which cannot be solved easily in any century. As The Guardian observer said, Metropolis predicted the ideology of the class and race in 20th century (Bradshaw). Metropolis in a very distinct and accurate way combines social criticism, science fiction, psychological narrative and powerful love story. The combination of these factors makes it incredibly interesting to watch and impossible to ignore its huge contribution to the cinema medium and science fiction genre. Fritz Lang’s masterpiece is full of allegories, symbols and metaphors, but nevertheless it tells quite simple story though makes it in a way that makes viewer feel involved. The story tells us about the struggle between two different classes, which are represented by the love-duo of Freder and Maria who met each other by chance. The struggle takes place in the dystopian futuristic city of Metropolis which is ruled by indolent and cruel industrialists, who live in big skyscrapers and oppressed laborers who live underground. As you can see, Mr. Lang puts working class under the ground literally where they work hard so the city can stay alive, no matter what the cost is. Real millionaires of that time would be probably happy to put rebelling working class out of their minds and sight -under the ground. In the era of industrial progress when machines started taking control over the manufacture and human life in general, Metropolis turned out to be especially up-to-date. This industrial circumrotation was portrayed as horrible and fearful Molloh which can obviously be interpreted as Biblical symbol. While in real life hard-working families were hungry and oppressed with their job being taken from them and given to machines, Molloh-machine eats workers like a hungry giant or a savage beast in the movie. As Mr. Roger Ebert said, Metropolis forestalled countless symbolic and futuristic cities of the many films to come (Ebert). The City of Metropolis is a symbol of inequity and oppression because it is built with unhappiness and grief of those who are underground. As one of the first sci-fi pictures Metropolis shaped this genre in cinema itself. Metropolis was made in 1925 in Weimar Republic, the first attempt of democracy in Germany. The movie does not only show but in some way predicts problems of Weimar Republic and the reasons of its failure with Hitler taking full power in 1933. Social historian Detlev Peukert named schism of labor-movement, world financial crisis, and huge and total unemployment among the main reasons of the fall of Weimar Republic (Peukert 34). The estrangement between labor and high classes was total and incontrollable, having hundred thousands of poor and hungry on one side and rich minority which was partying and creating the ”Golden Twenties” on the other. This gap between poor and rich is where Metropolis ideologically stands, and love between two main characters, which is opposed to the never-ending hate and oppression, is what finally sets City of Metropolis free. As David Wharton stated very clearly, the miserable and unfortunate situation of huge masses at that time in Weimer Republic made people look for escape in cinema. So by creating a realistic social drama Fritz Lang could not make it interesting (Wharton). Instead he placed all the evil in future dystopian city: making an interesting film and expressing a social concern at the same time. Film is full of Biblical references and symbols (Eden Gardens, Seven Deadly Sins, Babylonian Whore, Apocalypse) and it eventually shows us that understanding can only be reached through love and compassion as well as the New Testament. It seems that the most important Biblical symbol is a Babylonian Whore, which is an evil android looking exactly like the main heroine. This robot is made by a cunning doctor (played spectacularly by great Rudolf Klein Rogge) on the behalf of city’s ruler, Freder’s father, to compromise Maria. Compromising is exactly what high and rich class was doing with labour, but in our dystopian futuristic movie it is a robot-android, while in reality it was progress itself. Industrialization and machines taking work from poor who knew only hard work and were forced to live on the street hungry and helpless without it, was another compromising factor. But of course it does not worry rich who do the work until it is done and thus they are not concerned about their workers ‘destiny. The imagery of the film is extremely powerful and it helped to create the atmosphere of dystopia on the first place. The city with its overhead and underground ways, its aero planes and lightning and mechanism, is a thing to wonder at, while photography is brilliant. Everybody was shocked of set design because it is truly astonishing. It summed up all the achievements of German expressionism and gave us a beautiful, symbolical, deeply human and genuine story about love, arrogance, madness and all those other things which are the engines of human behaviour. In my opinion the whole purpose of genre of dystopia is to show the problem by making the full contrast, showing the problem in somehow grotesque way so that it cannot be ignored. Unfortunately, the opposition of good and evil was not so obvious in the Germany of that time, where each party claimed itself good and all the others bad. This breach eventually led to dictatorship and establishment of Nazi. Funny detail, nevertheless, is that Hitler himself took several places on the film premiere at the Reichstag and later asked Lang to join the Nazis as the lead movie director of the Reich (Lang got packed almost immediately and left Germany). However, the ending of the film is more promising than the ending of Weimar Republic. The hand of Grot, the representative of workers, and the hand of John Frederson, the leader of the city, finally unites with a help of Freder and Maria. With this great sequence of symbols with each main character representing a definite idea, the struggle between classes is finished. Works Cited Bachman, H. & Minden, M. Kinematograph Weekly review by Mr. Collier from “Fritz Langs Metropolis: Cinematic Visions of Technology and Fear” Bradshaw, P. Metropolis Review, 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/sep/09/metropolis-restored-film-review Ebert, R. Metropolis, 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-metropolis-2010-restoration-1927 Peukert, D. 1992 The Weimar Republic : the Crisis of Classical Modernity. Read More