<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Metropolis: A Film Far Ahead of its Time</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.brokenprojector.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&#038;p=56" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.brokenprojector.com/wordpress/?p=56</link>
	<description>Cinema will save us</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Aug 2010 06:23:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gautam</title>
		<link>http://www.brokenprojector.com/wordpress/?p=56&#038;cpage=1#comment-3918</link>
		<dc:creator>Gautam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brokenprojector.com/wordpress/?p=56#comment-3918</guid>
		<description>Yes &#039;A trip to the moon&#039; was the first sci-fi short film and the feature-length 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea was indeed released in 1916. Metropolis becomes the first milestone of epic sci-fi cinema, the next one I would argue did not really come up until Kubrick&#039;s 2001 in the late 1960s. Also I find it great that Metropolis unlike 20,000 was not an adaptation of a previously published work (in this instance, a remarkable tale by Jules Verne). 

So I may be inaccurate in saying the Metropolis is the first ever sci-fi film but I would not hesitate to call it the first &#039;Real&#039; science-fiction film that pushed the limits of the cinematic technique and did what no one else could.

Thanks for your thoughts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes &#8216;A trip to the moon&#8217; was the first sci-fi short film and the feature-length 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea was indeed released in 1916. Metropolis becomes the first milestone of epic sci-fi cinema, the next one I would argue did not really come up until Kubrick&#8217;s 2001 in the late 1960s. Also I find it great that Metropolis unlike 20,000 was not an adaptation of a previously published work (in this instance, a remarkable tale by Jules Verne). </p>
<p>So I may be inaccurate in saying the Metropolis is the first ever sci-fi film but I would not hesitate to call it the first &#8216;Real&#8217; science-fiction film that pushed the limits of the cinematic technique and did what no one else could.</p>
<p>Thanks for your thoughts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Berg</title>
		<link>http://www.brokenprojector.com/wordpress/?p=56&#038;cpage=1#comment-3906</link>
		<dc:creator>Berg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brokenprojector.com/wordpress/?p=56#comment-3906</guid>
		<description>I love Metropolis as much as the next film nerd but it&#039;s not the first science fiction film. A Trip to the Moon is the first I believe (though I could very well be wrong). if you want to argue that Metropolis is the first full length sci fi film, 1916&#039;s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea is a full 105 minutes long.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love Metropolis as much as the next film nerd but it&#8217;s not the first science fiction film. A Trip to the Moon is the first I believe (though I could very well be wrong). if you want to argue that Metropolis is the first full length sci fi film, 1916&#8242;s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea is a full 105 minutes long.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
