My Metropolis review

Rotwang

Sr Member
I liken the version of metroplis we have seen until now with a heavily cut
down version of say, the Witches of Eastwick.

Now imagine you have seen the film and heard that Jack Nicholson plays a
major role in it, but all the versions you ever saw have Jack pop in a few
times and most of his scenes is missing.

That's what Metropolis feels like, suddenly a whole new character is part of
the story and he is damn great. I'm talking about the tall slim, somewhat
vampirish man Fredersen sends to keep an eye on his son Freder. He just
pops in a few times and looks ominous, that's about it. In the original
1927 reviews, Fritz Rasp, the actor is praised as one of the highlights of
the film, and we finally have him back.

Speaking of back, if you ever bet the maschinenmensch doesn't come with a back, you do get a shot of her back. At least her shoulders and head.

If you have any idea of the original story and have seen stills of the missing scenes you may think you have a pretty good idea of what you can expect, but this version throws a real curveball at you. Some of the best scenes and hammy expressionist acting to ever grace celluloid are there. Rotwang showing off his lost hand is a real hoot. Fredersen seeing the gigantic memorial to his dead wife is a touching moment.

A lot of the lost scenes deal mostly with background characters and their
involvment in the story and everything finally makes sense. How Maria
escapes the flooding city of the workers only to be hunted by them in the
upper city. It's all there and the movie suddenly works much better.
Freder's heroic side is strongly reinforced in this version.

At some point during the worker's revolt Fredersen tells Grot, the
supervisor to open the doors. We finally see the doors and by heck, they
could keep out an army of Jedi. Either George Lucas has some supernatural
powers of clairvoyance or he has a hidden copy of Metropolis, because
Metropolis has blast doors that makes those in Phantom Menace.look like a
bead screen.

Sadly, the restored footage is unsharp and streaky. There is only so much
digital cleanup can do. Dirt and scratches amalgamated over decades and
were copied onto the 16mm film and they are very visible. The image was
also cropped, but the essence of Metropolis is still there, the story is
restored.

Unlike what has been said previously two scenes are still missing. The Monk in the Cathedral and the fight between Fredersen and Rotwang, which allows Maria to escape.

A number of scenes have been tweaked from the 2001 version probably based on the complete 16mm footage. Also the digital cleanup is better now. Problems with lighting have been fixed and the earlier digial cleaning
technique seemed to have removed the more extreme levels of dark and light, making for a fairly flat, dull image with a lot of ghosting and other
problems. But now shiny objects really gleam, the robot suddenly acquires
her true metallic sheen and looks properly 3D. Even Rotwang's hand looks
sleek and menacing instead of rubbery.

The live music is also an improvement over the 2001 restoration. The tempo is different, the sound is deeper and richer overall.

If you thought the 2001 restoration was great, this version will quite
simply blow you away. You haven't seen Metropolis until you have seen this version.
 
The live music is also an improvement over the 2001 restoration. The tempo is different, the sound is deeper and richer overall.
RATS! i was hoping that the giorgio moroder soundtrack would be silpped in...

thanks for posting the review! i can't freaking wait for the BR!
 
Great review Patrick. Thanks for being so thorough. Looking forward to seeing it more directly, not just streamed from the venue in Berlin with all those freezing cold souls out there.
 
I've, um (should I admit this?) never seen any version of Metropolis.

What should I watch first? Do the shorter versions have any merits of their own? If so, should I start with the cut version, and go on to the restored one, or the other way around, or does the latest restoration do away with the need to even bother with any other version?

Should I only ever watch the Moroder one, and disregard all others? :D
 
My suggestion would be to look up the US version by Paramount or the Eureka one. That's the version most people knew for many years.

Next you'd do well to check out the Patalas version or the Moroder one since they are based on the same footage (Moroder essentially put up the cash so Patalas could do his restoration)

Finally wait for the restored version and just go from surprise to surprise.
 
Ah, thanks. I'm kind of glad you put it in that order. I've always found the theatrical cut>director's cut pathway very rewarding (excepting the SW SEs, that is) and haven't ever watched in reverse order. I'd sort of feel I'd be missing out on the thrill of restored scenes that you've been able to enjoy - which isn't strictly speaking exactly a sensible way to approach it, but you know what I mean, eh? :)
 
I have half a dozen versions myself either taped VHS or DVD.

Ironically the 2001 restoration feels the most orphaned now. It has the merit of being the most complete version up to that point, but it is also the culmination of earlier work, from the Soviets in the 1950's, building up to BBC version in the seventies and then Moroder and Patalas having most of the footage from around the world plus the censor notes and full intertitles to work with.

So Patalas' work while maybe not qualitatively perfect, is the big milestone and a lot of info finally comes to light. Patalas must be credited for realising that Hel plays a crucial part in this film.

Like I said before you should track down the US version (where Fredersen is called Masterman) there should be some old VHS tapes on Ebay and then compare it to the restored version, it's like two different films.
 
Last edited:
Awesome, awesome, AWESOME! Hopefully Kino will be able to keep to schedule and have the Blu-Ray disc out at Christmastime.
 
Cool, I can't wait to see this myself.

On a side note, as much as I'm irked by the recent slew of Hollywood remakes, I'm surprised that this is one that they've never done. But the real question is, should they? I mean, I think I'd rather see a movie like this done again, than say the day the earth stood still. lol
It would be one thing if they had already done so 3 or 4 times.
Not saying that they should, but maybe a part of me would love to see a cool new false Maria. Maybe they will one day for the 100th anniversary.
 
The chances of the remake being very bad are quite high. I'm not opposed to somebody like Spike Jonze giving it a try.

I always thought a movie about the making of Metropolis itself would be a pretty neat idea, like RKO 281 about the making of Citizen Kane.
 
Question: what happened to the original, that there isn't a single "complete" print left?
Did they only make one print and it wore out?
 
Back
Top