Sociological Analysis Of Marxism In Metropolis

1041 Words5 Pages

The film Metropolis ends with the Foreman and Joh Fredersen shaking hands and making peace, after a clash between capitalists and workers. However, that ending doesn't lead us to a clear conclusion and leaves many questions unanswered. This paper seeks to analyze if this peace is a rational one and if the end of the movie is a moment of totalitarianism. Metropolis is an indicative film of class and social issues. It is based on Marx’s class analysis, with the bourgeoisies at the top of the economic hierarchy, managers in the middle and workers at the bottom of the financial scale. As in Marx’s analysis of capitalist society, in the film we can clearly see how the bourgeois classes maintain their lifestyle by exploiting and mistreating the workers. The workers cannot be distinguished, they don't have an identity and a individuality, they are identified only by numbers. The capitalists live in luxurious spaces above ground, while the workers live beneath the surface of the ground, in miserable houses. Those factors point out the dissimilarities of the two classes, which bring us to the conclusion that there will always be an inevitable conflict between them. In …show more content…

Grot, the Foreman of the Heart Machine, and Joh Fredersen, the head of Metropolis, shake their hands and make peace. The handshake could mean that the two classes forget class struggle. However, we cannot be sure if the end of this conflict brought an ideal system, satisfactory for both classes. The ending of the film leaves many questions unanswered. For example, will the relationship between the two classes be improved? What will Joh Fredersen’s attitude to the workers be after he has nearly lost his son in the underground catastrophe? Will Freder take over his father’s role as master capitalist or will he join the workers, sharing with them the same living conditions? Therefore, the end of the movie does not guarantee

Open Document