This book is really just one big confusing religious connotation. A little much for me. It has some pretty intriguing imagery, though.

I first saw Metropolis at the age of 15 thanks to my Literature Teacher. She made an extracurricular course in the History of Movies, and Metropolis was the first movie of the course. At that time, I remember being completely flabbergasted by the aestethic of the movie, the special effects obtained through cuts and juxtaposition, and the unbelievable richness in detail.
Today, if you ask me about my Top 10 of Best Movies of All Time, you can be sure that I would mention Metropolis.
I am warning you to expect a fairly biased review.

The Book is the novel written by the script author Thea von Harbou to accompany the making of the movie.

"This book is not a depiction of the present.
This book is not a depiction of the future.
This book does not take place anywhere.
This book serves no tendencies, no class, no political party.
This book is an event which blooms from the realization:
Mediator between the brain and the head must be the heart".

This is my translation of the foreword of the book, which I am lucky to be able to read in German.
Since the writing style is a mix of expressionistic symbolism and romantic Sturm-und-Drang-ish descriptions I am quite sure that any reader in English or any other translation had no chance of enjoying the book.

Fritz Lang gave his own reply to Frau von Harbou's introduction:

"The main work was of Miss Harbou, but I am responsible of at least 50% of it since I directed the movie. At that time I was not as politically interested as I am today. One cannot make a socially relevant movie stating that the mediator between brain and hand must be the heart - I mean, this is just a fairy tale, really. But I was interested in machines..."

Most of those who saw the movie and moved on to read this book may see how the two statements from the very authors explain a lot about why Metropolis was praised for his visuals and flopped because of its content.
While Thea von Harbou exploited the dystopian setting to convey, in the very tradition of the expressionistic movement, a strong message in symbols, Fritz Lang wanted the setting to be the center of a colossal movie. The director was famous for his perfectionism and his ability to push his team on set to the maximum of its capabilities, so that, even today, Metropolis keeps impressing the audience with its fantastic setting, its amazing photography and its strong imagery.

Critics perceived "Metropolis" as the triumph of kitsch, and even H.G. Wells said that it was the "dumbest movie" he ever saw.

I think that the themes in Metropolis resonate with us more today than they did 90 years ago.
Without Metropolis, there would not have been "Blade Runner" or Gotham City in Tim Burton's "Batman". Videogame fans could never have enjoyed such amazing titles as "Bioshock", "Soma" or "The Observer" if the questions asked in Metropolis had never been asked.

What is the difference between a man and a machine? What happens if machines take over our society and determine the way we live? What is the "mass" and why is the mass often underprivileged? When does the machine become more human than humans? Where is the dignity of man if production is automated?
What are the things we need in order to function beyond class and privilege?

I think that we were not ready to answer these questions 90 years ago. We were not as connected and aware of the diversity of our existence as we are today, and it was not customary to question one's position in the world. If you were born a son of a butcher, you became a butcher. If you were a woman, there were very few professions that were starting to open to women, and you were not well judged if you were going against your "natural role" as a mother and wife.
Classes were in fact as separated as they are in "Metropolis", and chances to confront oneself with realities different than ours were limited. The necessity to be perceived as normal was stronger, and individuality was given up in favor of the typical sense of collectivity which comes after a nation lost a war.

I am amazed by the fact that Thea von Harbou was a prolific screenwriter during the Nazi Period (Hitler and Göbbels were very impressed by Metropolis and twisted, as usual, most of its symbolism), since both the film and the book are very vocal about issues of inequality and lack of empathy for the "different". She and her husband Fritz Lang separated after he emigrated in 1933 because of his refusal to accept the new order in Nazi Germany, declining a position as lead director of German Cinema of the Regime.

Their collaboration in the movie seems ever precious after reading the book. The evident influence of the Romantic Movement on Thea von Harbou's writing would have ended in a total different movie if Fritz Lang did not feel the need to make the universe of Metropolis as real and fantastic as possible.
The book contains lenghthy passages of emotional turmoil, tidal waves of tragic and metaphorical descriptions, and the modern reader will not experience an easy reading. The pace in which the events unfold is continously broken by comparisons, sometimes far fetched, of the characters state of mind with natural, musical and artistical images. The author uses repetition as a way to better convey the mechanical and obsessive ryhthms that domain in the book, which was remarked in other reviews as annoying but, for me, serves the purpose well.

I enjoyed the book because I love the movie and wish that everyone could understand why I do.
Set in the Zeitgeist of the time, the book was well written, in a genre which was getting popular among intellectuals and authors (who are forgotten today), and may have even become a success if the movie was not the flop it was. "Metropolis" contributed greatly to the death of UFA, which was bigger than Hollywood in the beginning of the history of cinematic movies, and was one of the most expensive movies in German film history.

I would recommend this book to any fan of the movie. You will see the scenes moving before your eyes while reading.

Dieses Buch ist für mich ein Meisterwerk der Schreibkunst. Die Sprache ist bildgewaltig und rhetorisch sehr stark. Auch das Thema ist immer noch erschreckend aktuell.