Who am I talking about? Who but Robot Maria, the evil cyber-alchemical doppelgänger of sweet organic Maria in Fritz Lang’s 1927 Metropolis. No joke.
In the above shot Robot Maria’s letting Joh Fredersen, the “brain” or “head” of the futuristic titular megacity, that she totally “gets” what he’s on about and is ready to get the job done.
And here, she’s fascinating the super-rich patrons of the Yoshiwara nightclub, and pretty much literally embodying the you-know-what of Babylon. Rockin’ the headgear, natch. To think that actress Brigitte Helm was a mere teen when she acted in this. Kick ass!
Who knew that these would be the most actually prescient aspects of this delirious epic, which will be screening in a newly restored version presented by Kino International at Manhattan’s Film Forum beginning May 6 7? The new restoration, which adds almost thirty minutes of newly-found (and frequently rather rough-looking) footage to Lang’s epic, fleshes out certain plot threads—the “Thin Man“ ‘s pursuit of Freder Frederson, for instance, which has some great cat-and-mouse action—and expands on certain crucial action scenes, such as the attack on the city’s “Heart Machine.” The reason the restored footage looks so rough is because its source is a very old 16mm print found in Argentina a couple of years back. In the new restoration, this footage is presented in a different scale from the previously restored stuff; there’s a black border on the top and left sides of the frame. The effect is slightly…scholarly. But it doesn’t at all detract from the film’s exhilaration. And the new material of course also adds mightily to the film’s, well, ridiculousness.
While Lang and producer Erich Pommer were inspired by their first glimpse of the New York City skyline when they shared an ocean voyage to the States in 1924, who the hell knows what was inspiring scenarists Lang and Thea von Harbou when they cooked up Metropolis’ stew of religious allegory and goofy labor-relations parable. The film’s epigram about how the “mediator” between “brain and hands must be the heart” is one of the most empty-headed bromides ever to not grace a Hallmark card. (And it says quite a bit about Madonna Ciccone’s intellectual attainment, such as it is, that she adopted it whole-heartedly for that dopey Metropolis-homage video for “Express Yourself.”) H.G. Wells was in fact one-hundred percent correct when he deemed this “the silliest film.” It’s not just the nonexistent-to-incoherent philosophy it trucks in. I mean, think about it: Joh Frederson (the great Alfred Abel), decides he’s going to use Rotwang’s Robot Maria to drive the workers to violent unrest, after which he will have a perfect excuse to oppress them further, and violently. But apparently it doesn’t occur to him that as said workers go about their violent unrest, they’re likely to do such damage as to pretty much shut the city down. Which they do. After which Fredersen…calls in the army or national guard he’s had on alert since hatching his scheme, instructing them to impose martial law? Why no, he does no such thing. Such a strategy isn’t even mentioned. No, instead Fredersen staggers to Metropolis’ cathedral, to witness the climactic rooftop battle between his dippy son Freder and the magnificently evil Rotwang (the even-greater-than-Abel Rudolf Klein-Rogge).
That’s right, Joh; don’t just do something, kneel there!
Metropolis is also one of the earliest and most significant proponents of the “who cares if it makes sense, as long as it looks cool?” school of filmmaking. (A friend reminded me of The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari when I brought up this notion, and he has a small point; only Caligari’s overt subject happens to be the derangment of the senses, which gives its visuals a wholly apropos rationale throughout.) What the hell does the clock-looking gizmo that worker Georgi (aka “11811”) has to tend to actually do, anyway? Why does Good Maria keep dicking around with those heavy levers even after she’s got the gong alarm sounding but good? Etc. We all know the answer to these questions, finally, which is “Who cares?”
Which brings me to a final question: Would Metropolis be as much of a blast if it were, in fact, smarter and/or made more sense? Lang’s prior Dr. Mabuse Der Spieler (which, we should recall, was adapted from an outside source) is equally thrilling but not nearly as risible. And for that, I still think this picture’s unself-conscious pulp idiocy is somehow part of its greatness. And if someone would like to argue that it’s not idiocy, I’m willing to entertain that, too. In any event, this new Metropolis is essential viewing. Of course.
or ‘Radio Ga-Ga’?
Excellent post, can’t wait to see this in May.
Didn’t respected auteur David Fincher direct the video for “Express Yourself”? Actually, I’m the right age for that video to be steeped in nostalgia now.
Ha! You know Rob, I believe he did. Oh well. I don’t think “Se7en” is that smart, either…
Is the the Gottfried Huppertz score present? I saw the movie with Mororoder’s the first time, and had to force myself into liking it. But once I saw it with the original score, I was totally overwhelmed in all the right ways. Great Wagnerian score, and nothing less would really fit.
Here’s a question one of the cinephiles here should be able to answer: Was Helm’s Maria the first film robot that looked identical or nearly-identical to a human? I ask because it’s always struck me that one of Metropolis’ most stunning achievements is Helm’s performance, which is just so goddamn unsettling and riveting. It’s would be all the more stunning if Helm were a pioneer in the world of android-playing thespians. I mean, what, if anything, did she have as a point of reference for her performance? If Lang just told her, “Remember, you’re a machine, but you look like a human” and she devised all the performance’s little expressions and movements and mannerism and tics on her own, without having any preconception for what a robot-in-human-skin should act like… well, it strikes me as one of the most vital pieces of creative work in science fiction.
” I don’t think “Se7en” is that smart, either…”
Bless you for that Glenn.
I remember back in 1989 at the MTV awards Fincher had three of the four or five nominee spots for Best Direction. If I’m not mistaken they were the aforementioned Express Yourself (the winner), Aerosmith’s Janie’s Got a Gun, and Don Henley’s The End of the Innocence.
Fincher won the award again the following year for Madonna’s Vogue.
Glenn’s right: Seven isn’t that smart (however entertaining and well-made), though neither is spelling it in that contrived fanboy way with the “7” in place of the “v”. The Game is a much deeper, meditative film, and never gets credit for it because of the gimmicky plotting. I think it makes a great companion piece with Benjamin Button, actually, and looks stronger in retrospect because of the connection.
The clock-looking gizmo may not make logical sense, but it’s a wonderful visual symbol of factory workers as slaves to the clock. Although of course Lang has to make everything too obvious by turning the factory machinery into an infernal image of Moloch. Less meaning! More delirium! Or more Maria, as the case may be. Oh hell, more Rotwang! Less Freder!
lazarus, I agree with you on THE GAME– it’s the Fincher film I enjoy the most, and it’s a nice reminder of what an underrated performer Michael Douglas really is. There are, as you say, a lot of plot contrivances in the film, but he holds it together with that quiet, terrifying calm he has in the early sections– no matter how silly the events of the narrative, he gives himself over to them with great sincerity. And it would make an interesting double bill with WONDER BOYS.
Lazarus, I was under the impression, perhaps mistaken, that the stupid spelling with the numeral subbing for the “v” is actually the proper spelling of the title. Verily, that’s how it’s listed in the incredibly reliable IMDB. I don’t like it either. Just trying to follow proper usage. I’d be happy to spell it as the word is actually spelt if that’s in fact how the title goes. Jeez, a guy tries to do due diligence on copy and he gets called a “fanboy” for his trouble, why the fuck do I even bother…
Technically you’re correct, Glenn. According to IMDB both spellings are legit, but notice how it’s spelled on the poster that appears in the corner of the page!
Officially or not, that numerical spelling is just lame, its Nine Inch Nails aesthetic beyond dated. Sometimes you gotta sidestep journalistic integrity to thumb your nose at these kinds of things. I mean, who can remember how Singleton’s Boys in the Hood is actually written out?
FWIW, “Boys in the Hood” actually looks quite odd to me. But I figured Glenn was being at least a touch ironic–as well as accurate–in spelling Seven that way. I mean isn’t the statement “I don’t think “Se7en” is that smart, either…” almost tautological when you use that spelling?
I’d love to hear you guys elaborate on what you dislike about “Seven”. Me, I’ll admit that its philosophical/theological underpinnings don’t resist much rational examination, but what I like about the film is how it sucks you into its worldview, to the point where you don’t care about it, nor about how gimmicky the premise sounds on paper. And the ending, of course, is the perfect cherry on top of that (erm… well, a bleak, nihilistic cherry, anyway).
If you want to see a stupid version of “Seven”, watch “The crimson rivers”, the french film by Mathieu Kassovitz.
Seven (Se7en) might not be that smart, but Zodiac is. And so is Fight Club, in its raucous, wacky way.
Re spelling and such: Yeah, I dunno. I haven’t had call to write about Singleton’s film in a while, so I’m not sure how I’d handle it. I suspect I would be strongly inclined to go with the version as printed. After all, one doesn’t write the name of Soderbergh’s debut as “Sex, Lies And Videotape” just on account of not liking the serial comma, does one?
As for, um, “Seven:” a conceptual serial killer movie in which the murderer shows his disdain for “lust” by murdering the goddamn hooker clearly hasn’t thought things through that thoroughly. Not just stupid, but crass, exploitative, misogynist. Well made, yes. But here Fincher would have done well to have looked below the attractions/possibilities inherent in its surfaces…
“After all, one doesn’t write the name of Soderbergh’s debut as “Sex, Lies And Videotape” just on account of not liking the serial comma, does one?”
Maybe the guy from Vampire Weekend would.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Comma_(song)#Song_Title_and_Meaning
Your criticisms about Seven are certainly valid, but I’d take Andrew Kevin Walker more to task for creating it than Fincher for not changing it. It’s better directed than written, that’s for sure. Glenn, I’m wondering what you think of The Silence of the Lambs, which in my opinion is just as crass, exploitative, and misogynist, despite the female lead. It’s one of the most overrated films I’ve ever seen, and I can’t believe people still celebrate its undeserved Oscar wins, Foster excepted.
Amazing piece, really can’t wait to see this new version – I’ve been lucky enough to have only seen Metropolis on the big screen so far. Just wanted to mention that I see you have May 6th as the opening date at the Film Forum where the website itself says it starts screening on the 7th.
I think Mabuse Der Speiler is a vastly better film; Metropolis to me is a really interesting failure, albeit one whose high points, and there are many, outshine most directors’ entire careers.
I just saw Metropolis (digitally projected, with live music by the Alloy Orchestra) at Grauman’s Chinese; it was the closing night big event of the TCM Classic Film Fest. This gorgeous new print, with the rediscovered footage, with that music, on that enormous screen – well, it blew everyone’s mind. It was stupendous. The rediscovered footage really helps. This is the first time the story truly hung together for me. You all have a treat in store.