Metropolis

Hmm…it’s very easy for us to be overly charitable to old films, to say, ‘Remember, things weren’t as sophisticated back then, you have to make allowances.’ Visually, yes, and in terms of how much dialogue can be included, certainly. But compared to the other silent classics I’ve watched in the last few months, it didn’t compare favourably. It didn’t have the immediacy or tight plotting of the contemporary Caligari and while it was strikingly innovative (and hugely expensive) in terms of visuals, with amazing costumes, camera tricks and sets for the time, it lacked the playfulness and real sense of breaking boundaries found in the much earlier Trip to the Moon. And, honestly, it was dull. The exposition dragged on and on, there were far too many cuts of Maria gurning (her interpretation of how a robot would move is very different from ours today, more like a pantomime witch, all stares and twitching, which is appropriate given the second Maria’s fate). The plot is sloppy and dreamlike sequences really bizarre and disjointed, and the fact that H.G.Wells gave an unfavourable review drives home the fact that in the twenties, it was just as possible to write good solid plots as it is today, even without established Hollywood formulae. The only surprise was how risqué the exotic dance sequences were, when we’re forever being told how prudish pre-60s, never mind pre-WWII entertainment was.

I’m glad to have watched it, but I’ll likely never do so again. Interesting visuals, but a dreadful script.