By Danielle Bettendorf, Living & arts editor
As a pseudo-connoisseur of film, I’m always trying to learn more about the industry outside of my immediate interests. To expand my horizons, I looked into a list created by Turner Classic Movies: 52 movies deemed “must see” and why. To start things off, I began with a 1920s two-and-a-half-hour German silent sci-fi film: “Metropolis.”
Off the bat, I’ll say this wasn’t really my type of movie. My earliest favorite films came out in the 40s and sci-fi isn’t my go-to genre. On top of that, I get antsy during movies, so trying not to look at my phone for almost three hours so I could pay attention to the plot was difficult for me.
The film takes place in the titular city and follows the ruler of the city’s son. As a member of the upper class, the son is originally unaware of the cruelties that the working class endures, but later becomes involved in the revolution for worker’s rights.
In order to keep his son from getting involved, the ruler and an inventor kidnap the son’s love interest and model a robot after her to infiltrate the revolution. It took me two tries to watch this movie and I fell asleep during both of them.
“Metropolis” has been praised today for its special effects and influence on the science fiction genre, but I’d argue that while these are credible claims, the film as a whole does not hold up today.
Parts of it are just because it’s so old: the film has been restored and lengthened multiple times as more of the movie has been found and there’s one section that, lost to time, has been replaced with a title screen explaining what happened in the missing footage. It isn’t anyone’s fault that the film is so old, but the noticeable gap in the plot definitely doesn’t do it any good.
And coming from a 21st century American standpoint, I am biased, but I didn’t connect with any of the writing. I didn’t care about any of the characters, rather, as the movie went on I began to hate it more and more.
I wasn’t into the style, especially in some of the more extraordinary scenes – watching workers trudge into a fire, or a robot perform a creepy dance, or the Grim Reaper move to off music, or a collage of eyes float around the screen are not things that make me happy.
The film ended on a good note, with more promise for the workers, but I felt nothing but relief that the movie was over.
“Metropolis” shows that even if something is revolutionary for its time period, it isn’t always the pinnacle of its kind.
The movie can be recognized for its technical efforts, but should also be criticized for the degrees it took to finish the film.
For one, it should be remembered that both extras and the main cast were abused during production. While filming, roughly 500 children almost went through hypothermic shock, the main actress was almost set on fire and multiple actors were worked to the point of exhaustion.
Modern films can also tackle subject matter that would not have been handled in the past: one example of this is “Black Panther,” which director Ryan Coogler said was influenced by works such as those by Francis Ford Coppola in the 70s.
While Coppola’s works have gained critical acclaim since premiering, “Black Panther” has done something his works haven’t: given long-needed representation to black people. Coppola’s and Coogler’s works cannot be directly compared, but it is inarguable that Coppola’s works did nothing for people of color, whereas “Black Panther” was more monumental in this sense.
In the same vein, musicians Lady Gaga and Janelle Monae have drawn from “Metropolis” in their music videos, in addition to making strides for the LGBT community in their respective careers.
“Metropolis” influenced science fiction, but its successors influenced the wider world in more substantial ways. While current filmmakers can attribute techniques to the film, they are doing more and more for social movements than in the past. That cannot be ignored within the film industry.
