M el Maldito

M has to be one of the most influential movies ever made, both technically and psychologically. With an outstanding Peter Lorre, suspense that outsuspenses Hitchcock, excellent cinematography and a deep sociological layer added to it, M is one of the masterpieces of the psychological thriller genre.

It is a film devoid of typical humanitarian propaganda, yet it is not the case that we immediately feel the need to relate to the child murderer Hans Beckert ( Peter Lorre ) since Fritz Lang also shows us the effects his gruesome crimes have in the form of the police constantly raiding establishments, the grieving parents & random people accusing eachother of the murders. It is not a movie that forces its opinion on you, but causes you to think about what is truly right and wrong. Hans later claims he cannot help himself because he has an irresistible compulsive urge to kill which cannot be stopped, much to the dismay of other career crooks who claim they only commit crimes to survive and take no pleasure or feel no compulsion towards it. It is a psychological kind of movie that is still as relevant as ever today as it was in 1931.

Peter Lorre is ofcourse the perfect fit for the psychopathic child murderer, he has the perfect innocent wide eyed look for a psychopath, who seems to even be likeable when he is not murdering children. His signature whistle by Edvard Grieg - In the Hall of the Mountain King is a nice creepy addition to his character which he uses to lure kids to their doom. Ofcourse the incredible shot at the start which focuses on Hans's shadow on the poster that lists his crimes and reward for capture while talking to a little girl before killing her is a great ironic symbolism to announce his character.

It was Lang's first sound picture, yet only two third of the movie was shot with actual sound while everything else was shot silent. This was primarily to keep the costs down since sound equipment was very expensive at the time. It creates a weird mix in constant transitioning from silent to sound. Yet as Lang has stated it adds another layer to the eeriness the movie has, so it only enhances the experience instead of unimmersing you out of the film.

The cinematography is revolutionary in its use of low key lightning, which is a technique that was used many times after in the classic Film Noir era in Hollywood. The result is many Film Noirs share a visual resemblance with M due to their dark tone. Not only visually, but psychologically many themes of M have been repeated throughout the years in cinema. It was one of the first instances of a semi-sympathetic look on a pure psychopathic murderer, which has been repeated countless times in later years.

Some might feel sorry for Beckert for having this affliction of which he cannot be helped while others would prefer to see him hang, the movie doesn't shove the right answer down our throats, and it's possible to look at it from either way without having a right answer. It is a sociological thinking man's picture that is as relevant now as it ever was.

Being a huge fan of German Expressionist art, I'm naturally drawn to the films of Fritz Lang. I recently was able to see the restored version of "Metropolis" on the big screen, and was delighted to see "M" on the Sundance channel - especially since it was the uncut version. M follows the trail of a child killer (Peter Lorre), sought both by the police and the members of the underworld whose businesses are being effected by the investigation.

This film is ground-breaking for many reasons: It is Fritz Lang's first talking picture, it is one of the first in the serial killer genre and it was overtly anti-Nazi. This film was banned in Germany shortly after it premiered, and Fritz Lang and Peter Lorre, both Jews, soon fled the country. It has superb acting (most notably, Peter Lorre's trial scene in the catacombs) and very stark yet at times gritty cinematography. The story is indeed suspenseful and at times, very creepy (what whistling child killer isn't?). The entire movie, however is extremely thought-provoking and challenging, much like the German Expressionist movement itself.

This is not a movie for everyone; some may find it boring, some may find it too abstract. It also has one of the most bizarre shots I've ever seen in film - essentially it's a 30 second shot of the police inspector talking on the phone, but you're under his desk and looking up his pants leg. It actually kind of baffled me and made me chuckle for a second, but it was avant garde if anything.

To those who appreciate early cinema that truly makes you think, both about the film and the subtext with which it was written and filmed, it is a must-see.

--Shelly

The opening scene of this movie is the first clue to its near perfection – A mother preparing dinner for her child, waiting anxiously for her to return from school. Her hope, and then distress as she hears people pass outside her door. While down in the streets of Berlin, her daughter is receiving a balloon from a strange man in a long black coat. We know what's going to happen, but it's still horrific to watch.

Fritz Lang, you cinematic god! A simple story of the underworld, the police, and a single man holding an entire city hostage, and done with such precision and pre-noir darkness that is oozes creepy suspense from beginning to end.

But this movie is not so simple as the police inspectors trying to catch a devious murderer – it's about the mob, employing its network of beggars and petty thieves also trying to bring the killer to their own brand of justice. Apparently, the police crackdown caused by the murders is bad for business – so the mob begins to track him down as well.

It's not only a great crime story, and perhaps the first physiological thriller (the murderer is schizophrenic) but there's comments to be made here about the nature of justice, and who should best dispense it.

In all, not only a trail-blazing classic, but THE trail-blazing classic.

Casting its shadow through motion picture history and continuing to do so to this day, suggesting that societies throughout the world have struggled to resolve the most despicable actions of their citizens (inc. those in the police and armed forces) and the penalties they should pay - as seen by the gamut of forfeits that can be incurred for the same crimes across the planet, as well as those that are crimes in some territories and not in others.

Ultimately this film asks the question: what makes us who we are, how responsible are we for our actions and what should be done about it and by whom? To this day, as subjective a set of questions as you could wish to ask - but ones we will forever continue to try and answer and cinema will continue to catch in its shadows.

The first time I saw M, by Fritz Lang, I almost didn't know what to make of it. I was overwhelmed by the power of the performances, the staging of the scenes, the locations, and the power that the simple story had with such complex circumstances. Then I saw it again, and a third time, and I know that this is one of the best films ever to come out of Germany- it's a powerful statement about protecting our children (if you're looking at it as a "message" movie), but in reality it is just a piece of cinema heaven. Thrillers today only wish they could draw a viewer into the mystery elements, and have such unconventionality of the times. Boiling down to this, M is about a child Killer - the legendary character actor Peter Lorre in his first major role - who snatches children when their parents don't watch, and continues on until an investigation goes underway. But as the police investigate overly thoroughly into the real criminal underworld, they know something is up, that this is someone far more gone than they could ever be, so they join in the hunt. This all leads to one of the supreme dramatic climaxes in any thriller.

On the first viewing I just went straight for the story, which is able to suck one in enough to make you feel dizzy. But on the multiple viewings it becomes even more interesting as one can study the intricacy, and indeed full-on artistry, of Lang's camera. He puts it in unusual places at times, and adds for good measure shades of dark and gray in many of the night scene (this is, by the way, a precursor to 'film-noir', which Lang later became an important director in the 40's and 50's). On top of this, there is a very modern sense of style in the editing- I remember a couple of scenes that surprised me editing wise. One is where the cops (I think it was the cops) have an argument about the investigation- two of them get into a shouting match, and we get medium close-ups of them going back and forth. This is done quickly, with a kind of intensity that isn't even captured in today's thrillers. There is also the hunt for Lorre in the digging of the house, where Lang cuts around constantly, heightening the tension between the predators (the criminals) and the prey (Lorre), until it's almost too much to take.

The disturbing aspects of the story, of child abduction and murder, have become benchmarks of a number of today's thrillers, where the cop is usually the subject and the killer left more in the shadows, in cat & mouse style. This doesn't happen here, and because of it by the time we get to the final scene, with Lorre being interrogated and giving his "I can't help it" speech, it becomes something poetic, tragic, frightening. Lang doesn't leave his "message" so simplistically, he makes sure we know Lorre's side too, however twisted it has become, and the antagonist is shown as human as opposed to these present-day thriller where the killers are barely given one dimension let alone two. There were reports that during filming Lang put Lorre through torture, ultimately causing the two to never work together again. But nevertheless, out of this comes a towering performance of a small, wild-eyed criminal in the midst of an extremely well-told and unpredictable mystery story. In short, if you don't know what you're in for when you hear that whistle, those several infamous notes, you may not at all.