Metropolis Review

[nfotxn]

Saw the Anime remake of the Sci-fi classic Metropolis tonight with Ian (etherlad). I enjoyed it, although Ian and I took it apart in an MST3k commentary of it though.

It's a problem I have with anime. As technically fantastic as it is, often that certain je ne sais quois of cultural divide really shines through. The villians have really subtle motivation. Why does the red barron want a robotic successor? Because it goes along with his techno tower of babel real well? Matches the the drapes and carpet?

The anachronistic future concept is interesting. The 20's if the 20's happened in the future. The by-product of remaking an old avant guarde film in the real future. Lots of communist/revolutionary imagery overtly stated. I enjoyed the soundtrack too.

But in the end there were those standard anime quirks that take away from it being a really great film. I think it's the directors, something about the pace of the dialog on the dub and too many establishing shots. Just not right. Not terrible, but not right. Combine that with the ambiguous motivation and you get that classic anime drag. When a 2hr movie feels like a 3hr chore, at certain points.

Still very enjoyable. I'd rate it a good 8/10.

To bed.

Comments

[dizzi-d.livejournal.com]

I'd agree - the bizarre "big band techno" soundtrack really clicked with me for some reason, but I had a hard time getting past the TinTin style characters. I had difficulty getting really wrapped up in any other parts of the "revolution" conflict, though. It seemed so whimsical and spur-of-the-moment that it didn't really match up with the truly evil nature of some of the main villains - these were colder even than your average Anime demons.

[nfotxn.livejournal.com]

I had difficulty getting really wrapped up in any other parts of the "revolution" conflict

Exactly, the motivation isn't really very well stated. There's maybe two small scenes with the diary about Tima's creation.. but it's really not well integrated in an accessible way. It's not very obvious that she's a "replacement" for the barron's daughter. Maybe it was my state of mind seeing the movie.

It's good, but a frustration notch away from great.

uh oh...

[jwall.livejournal.com]

OK, I'm going to shell out some free culture on this one, so hold out your hands and you might walk away with some class.

The “TinTin” character design was intentional. Metropolis is a comic book series over 50 years old. The character design was true to the original like any decent remake should be.

The original Metropolis manga by Tezuka Osamu was not a remake of Fritz Lang’s 1926 Metropolis. While one might argue that the look and style of the urban landscapes are dubiously similar, Progressivism, Modernism, and Futurism are architectural and sociological philosophies that predate both films. A huge statement was made in this movie using ideas created (and often assumed outdated) nearly a century ago, but the anachronistic vehicle for the society-vs.-free will didn't make the message any less pointed.

Red Barron desires a robotic successor because he lost his own daughter during a war. He had Tima created in the image of his dead child to “resurrect” her (the movie makes many such subtle connections to the relationship between the Judeo-Christian God and mortal man). He’s enormously guilt-ridden over her death and seeks to clear his conscience by creating a better, perfect version of his daughter through science and then giving the entire world to her. I would call creating an artificial human to replace your dead child so you can give the world to her and alleviate your guilt over her untimely death a simplistic (if deranged and totally megalomaniac) motivation. There’s hardly anything “subtle” about it.

Epic Japanese concepts and ideas do NOT translate into English well. The Japanese have a different perspective regarding culture vs. free-will than Westerners, and the emotional appeals made by Rock, the Marduk, and the revolutionaries to exterminate all robots to free humanity from hollow, unlabored existence (a huge Japanese sin) aren't appeals we can really identify with—-but that makes the plot no more sketchy or any less credible.

It was a beautiful and epic piece of cinema easily on par with any of Hollywood’s finest films.

Re: uh oh...

[nfotxn.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the FYI. I'd argue that it has a lot to do with the Fritz Lang film though. The scene where Time takes the throne, the deco architecture and time period. It's sort undeniable.

Re: uh oh...

[jwall.livejournal.com]

I'll admit that Lang's Metropolis did Modernism and deco when it was still new-- but both are old ideas now and sorta slid into public domain at the start of 60’s. The films both cover a lot of common ground, but that’s unavoidable given the issues explored and the philosophical vehicles the plots used to progress. I think a good modern example is that now when we see sweeping frozen action-shots or "bullet time" in any movie, we say "that's so Matrix," even though the technology for bullet-time sequences and digital cinematography predates Matrix AND it's progeny. The One didn't rip off The Matrix, they both ripped off Gap commercials and National Geographic humming bird films from the early 80’s.

I argue that Osamu didn't rip off Lang--they both ripped off Parisian and Victorian progressives and modernists. The idea that man would render himself obsolete through his own hubris and progress was the counter platform of Victorian naturalists that opposed the progressives push for urbanization and industrialization.*

Both films cover ideas and issues much older than either of them. Hats off to Lang for doing it first, but I think Osamu's film easily stands on it's own. I'm still gonna have to stand my ground and say that Osamu's Metropolis was NOT a remake of Lang's Metropolis.


*Although dangerous “progress” mainly applied to the dehumanizing political and social institutions formed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries to cope with new social pressures created by urbanization--the idea/fear of being replacing by robots didn't come until much later (though the idea was certainly in place by the time Lang filmed his Metropolis). Early naturalists believed that humanity’s punishment would manifest in a divine way in accordance with Biblical notions of retribution, but God or the bitchy-sensitive-perpetually-menstruating-Earth Mother were easily replaced with robots as technology advanced. Either way, the vision of man’s punishment manifesting to assume a throne above him and dull out punishment is as old as Christianity, so I could even argue that neither Lang or Osamu pioneered that idea.

If you can't tell, this is sort of a thing of mine. Any time you feel like knocking me down a notch, quiz me on the Harlem Renaissance or Canadian history--they're equally vague.

Re: uh oh...

[jwall.livejournal.com]

Fuck this. Go see Minority Report. It'll rock your world.

"Increase the 'Flash Gordon' noise and put more science stuff around."

[(Anonymous)]

Ya spends yer money, ya takes yer chances. I don't know from cultural time periods and all that, but it's damn pretty to look at. PLUS! Since my Mommy bought me the DVD, I had new stuff to scan. Yay me!

If I dig back in my journal, i think it's safe to say that

[plaidninja.livejournal.com]

I think you and I had almost identical reactions to this film.