Metropolis was my first experience with a silent film. In the past from shows on t.v., I saw a glimpse of what silent films were like. Silent films seemed to receive the stereotype of being goofy, fast movement, old-fashioned, and goofy piano music in the backround. Silent films to me appeared cheap and quick developed. I also found it hard to even get a storyline out of silent films. From watching Metropolis, it changed my perspectives on silent films and showed me that they can be something more.
First of all, Metropolis did not show those stereotypes of what I expected out of a silent film. In a silent film, visuals are important. When watching the movie, the actors movements appear to be goofy but it appears that way since vocals are taken out. In silent films the actors speak through movement. It shows near the beginning of the movie when Freder displays his love for Maria through movements and dancing. Also from reading through the chapter about cinematography I now understand how silent films get there fast paced movements. As for the third stereotype I mentioned, the film was indeed old-fashioned but in terms of the era of the movie's creation. The movie itself strives to be a more modern film and depict a moment in the future. Finally for the music, there was no goofy piano music. The music could very well be created after the release of the film but the film's music captures the emotion that the actors feel and there was a vast amount of instruments being played.
The next idea to mention is the fact that Metropolis was not cheaply made. From looking the modeling of the city with cars passing by, this movie took time and care to make. The special affects looked like they were before their time. For example the scene when Hel becomes Maria, the lighting was unreal and depicted future in the making. The actors appeared to be the best that silent films had to offer. The actors were charismatic and you could almost believe you were actually hearing them. The film truly looked like the most expensive silent film at its time. Also this movie busted my belief that silent films were quick when I found out that this one took a year in the making.
Finally from watching the film I understood that this film and other silent films have a storyline and a message to offer. Silent films can help us look back into the past and see people's perspectives of the present and their thoughts on the future. Metropolis foreshadowed what civilization would turn into the future and in ways was correct. Our society is made up of the work force and the men at the top who control the work force and even our way of life. Likewise in Bladerunner, the future looks to become dominated by corporations and the government has little say in controlling the world. This silent film had something to say and the message was clear.
It's cool that watching 'Metropolis' changed your opinion on silent films – I myself hadn't had much experience with them other than Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton, so I was only familiar with the very overly theatrical and comic side of silent film as well. However, interpreting that overacting as a way to communicate feelings is spot-on, I think. And while some might criticize that aspect of silent film, it's necessary to realize that it's done for *our* benefit – so we can better understand the film and the characters. Let's be real: a game of charades would hardly work if the players used minimal movement. In this way, 'Metropolis' perfectly demonstrates the fact that every part of film, silent or otherwise, is included for a reason.
ReplyDeleteI agree, who would ahve thought that Silent Films could evoke such emotion and subtleties without one of the most basic elements of modern film, speech. It was interesting, too, the way in which with such little text such a vivid plot could be illustrated. I enjoyed the actors in the silent film as well. They seemed to have a unique 20's era style of acting with less emphasis on realism and more emphasis on large whole body expressions.
ReplyDeleteFrom the comments and original post, I think we all have the same experience of silent films. To be honest, the amount of emotion, etc is exactly what the "true" actors of their time were all about. Up until audio was used in movies, actors did not have to worry about how they sounded, but solely how they "acted" while on camera. To compare those generation of actors with the current era of actors, it would be very hard. Today, actors must have the "whole" packages (voice and physical acting ability). If the current era of actors did not have those actors before them who mastered the art of being in character without sound, they would not be where they are at today.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am not a fan of silent films especially when dialogue is put in on black screens. I feel like metropolis would have been a lot deeper to me if there was no attempt at dialogue whatsoever and instead was completely silent. That way the entire plot would be driven more by emotion.
ReplyDeleteThats great that you were able to have your first experience with a silent movie. I agree, this is an incredible film that helps us understand the 20th century model of what we (society) looked forward to the future bringing. I feel like there is more to the dialouge than you give credit, that the over drawn out actions of the character acted as a bit of a crutch. Though I do understand your perspective and I guess i can see it either way. I wondered whether they were acting in such a way purposefully or as medium for the audience to understand tone. whatever I don't really know
ReplyDelete