As Freder looks upon the machines for the first time, the film seems to be making a statement about the relationship between man and machine. The workers follow the movements of the machine in a very robotic and choreographed manner. They appear to be mere extensions of the machine. From their expressionless faces as they enter and leave the shifts, it is possible that the machine gives life and animation to the workers. As the workers become exhausted, they must continue to work until they are useless. The continued movement of the machine is more important than the exhaustion of the workers.
Whether or not it is the intent of the film, I was very disappointed with the character of Freder. Throughout the film, he is a wide-eyed boy who does not seem to mature at all. In the garden scene in which we first meet him, the artificial and isolated environment seems to indicate he has been put in a playpen. The girl and other strangely dressed creatures are his playmates. When he sees Maria with the children, he seems to be more noticing a strange, new creature, rather than falling in love. She and the children are strange creatures who have escaped from another world, and he wants to see the world from which they have come. Later, with wide-eyed amazement, he gazes on the machines. As the machine explodes, he sees the disaster as a fairytale-like dream in which the machine becomes a mythical creature. Perhaps his ability to link the machines with a monster from the Old Testament reveals his educated mind or his understanding of the plight of the workers. To me, however, it seemed like he was replaying in his mind a scary bedtime story he had been told as a child to encourage him to stay away from the workers. Although the film script may have intended Freder to be the story's hero, the director appears to have made him into a ridiculous character. During the rooftop struggle between Freder and Rotwang, I found myself hoping Rotwang would win. That's not the usual response elicited by a film in response to a hero's struggle. This culminates in the reconciliation between Freder and his father. I did not find the ending very believable. Freder does not have the strength of character to be the mediator between his father and the workers, and, once order (and the division between master and worker) has been reestablished, Frederson will return to the domineering and controlling master that he was prior to the riot. It is almost an impressive public relations stunt on the part of Frederson, to make himself more acceptable to the workers.
The servitude of the workers is symbolized as Freder mans the clock-like machine. Just as time is run by mechanical laws and is a monotonous concept, the workers are mindless drones whose purpose is to operate and control these machines.
The owners on the other hand run rampantly around and live in areas such as the "Eternal Gardens." Their physical location, high above the machines, also shows the owners superiority over the workers.
One thing that must be understood is what dynamics were occurring during the film's period. Germany at this time was undergoing a major reconstruction, which made many of the citizens wary. The technological advancements were praised by some and made others skeptical. Metropolis shows a gross depiction of what modernity can do to society that is not prepared to handle such a drastic change.
There are certain aspects of the movie that were not clear as to their purpose. One major question that I had was why does Joh order the robot Maria to cause the workers to revolt and then when they do he tells the foreman to open the doors, which allows the workers to destroy the machines and ultimately the city. It seems like a self-destructive act on Joh's behalf.
The other question
is that the film seems to resolve in a concession between the workers and
the owners. Although this is all inferred from a symbolic handshake, I
ask have the workers actually won the heart of the owners or is this just
another ploy of the owners to gain more control over them.
Derek Rinderknecht
Fritz Lang's Metropolis
had some redeeming scenes but overall was
one of the most
boring movies I have ever seen. As a film, Metropolis
addressed a wide
range of social issues, including religion/science,
parenting, labor
rights, and class structure. Metropolis was also an
unmistakable political
reference ridiculing socialism. For instance, when
the robot Maria
persuades the mob to destroy the machines, the mob abandons
their children
and almost drowns them without realizing it.
However, this film
also questions whether a non-totalitarian government can
exist. The symbolic
handshake between the foreman and Friederson portrays
the failure of
the rebellion. The foreman, an employee of Friederson, can
have no control
over his boss's actions. Consequently, the workers lost all
they had gained
by revolting. In the end it almost seems as though
Friederson has
tricked his son and the workers, thereby enabling him to
simply tighten
his grasp over them.