According to Rutsky's essay on the movie, H.G. Welles allegedly called Metropolis "the silliest film" he had ever seen. Yet, when I saw the mindless workers living underground while the upper class enjoyed the fruits of their efforts, I could not help being reminded of the very same social juxtapositions highlighted in Welles' The Time Machine. As a matter of fact, the connection in my mind was so strong that at the time I assumed Fritz Lang was merely copying a previous cultural cliche, but it dawned on me afterwards that the initial strength of the movie is so dominated by its aesthetic ingenuity that certain relationships are understood as a direct result of the presentation. For example, it is one thing to say with subtitles or dialogue that the great Metropolis is run by a race of obedient workers. It is quite a different effect altogether to show faceless men frantically adjusting giant clock hands, suggesting a great fruitlessness in their efforts and grandly demonstrating that the workers are merely extensions of the machines they operate. Looking back on it now, I wonder if Fritz Lang also intended a metaphorical statement that in operating the hands of what appear to be clocks the workers are literally wasting their time. No doubt this movie brings together hundreds of culturally iconic semblances much in the same way as Star Wars, and like Lucas' masterpiece the enduring appeal of the story is in no small way a byproduct of its visual memorability. Every shot could convincingly be an expressionist painting, every scene regardless of the film as a whole works as an artistic triumph. Of course, it was still a long 120 minutes. :)