M le maudit

I commemorated the 25th anniversary from the death of director Joseph Losey (which occurred on 22nd June 1984) by watching his two best (and, ironically, rarest) Hollywood movies, both noirs made in 1951 – THE PROWLER and M. Fritz Lang's original 1931 version of the latter is not only generally considered to be its director's masterpiece but, on a personal note, is also included in my all-time Top 20 movies. Therefore, I had always been particularly interested in seeing how Losey (another director I admire a great deal) had tackled the daunting task of remaking – and relocating to L.A. – such an iconic German movie. Boasting the original's own producer, Seymour Nebenzal, the 1951 remake has been almost impossible to see and, actually, I only managed to track down a mediocre-looking print a few months ago; even so, I am certainly grateful to have been given the opportunity to catch up with it…especially in view of the fact that Sony's long-rumored Joseph Losey box set on R1 did not materialize after all! Perhaps inevitably, the film's initial stages (the murder of little Elsie) closely resemble those of Lang's film – even down to the choice of camera set-ups: the high angle shot down an eerily desolate flight of stairs, the close-up of the vacant breakfast table, the tell-tale shots of a solitary flying balloon and a rolling ball – but Losey nevertheless manages to gradually make the film his own, culminating in a trademark hysterical finale that highlights a new character not featured in the original: Luther Adler's alcoholic attorney who is, ill-advisedly, moved to turn against his boss Martin Gabel after the baby-killer's confession. David Wayne – best-known until then for playing lightly comic roles – is quite good in his own right (especially during the aforementioned trial sequence) if, understandably, falling short of Peter Lorre's unforgettable original characterization; similarly (and effectively) cast against type, Howard Da Silva makes for a fine Chief of Police, while the sterling supporting cast includes Raymond Burr (also atypically amusing as a raspy-voiced, leading underworld thug), Steve Brodie (as a sadistic cop), Glenn Anders and Jim Backus (as the mayor)! Interestingly enough, two directors-to-be were employed in minor capacities on this film: assistant director Robert Aldrich and script supervisor Don Weis. Allegedly, Fritz Lang balked at Nebenzal's offer to direct the remake himself and never forgave Losey for daring to touch his magnum opus…he must have conveniently forgotten the fact that he had himself remade in Hollywood two Jean Renoir classics – LA CHIENNE (1931) and LA BETE HUMAINE (1938) – as SCARLET STREET (1945) and HUMAN DESIRE (1954) respectively!

Seymour Nebenzal didn't have an especially illustrious career as a producer, either in Europe or the United States. Two of his American movies, in fact, SIREN OF ATLANTIS and this one, were remakes of movies he had produced in Europe. But in this case, he hired the right director.

Was it the growing Blacklist that resulted in this movie having no writing credits on screen? Perhaps, but also perhaps not, as the soon-to-be-blacklisted Howard da Silva and Joseph Losey both use their own names.

Losey and his team make excellent use of numerous Los Angeles locations, including Angel's Flight, Bunker Hill, the Bradbury Building (which is identified by name and location) and what seems to be that old amusement park in Long Beach, although what's seen here could be Venice.

David Wayne is fine as the disturbed child killer, and delivers the required final act speech very well. But he doesn't have the power and poetry of Lorre's performance--but then who in Hollywood in 1951 would have? The movie still has some of the comedy of Lang's original, but it's not as dry and sardonic, and there isn't as much of it. The score isn't good, and shoves the movie even more firmly in the direction of the melodrama it keeps threatening to become.

The very last shot is oddly theatrical in a literal sense: it looks like it is being performed on a stage. And I'm not sure what the point of the drunken lawyer trying to grasp a bit of his former glory really was. However, this element merely weakens the film, it doesn't destroy it.

No, this isn't as good as Lang's original, but Lang's original is perhaps the best film of a great director. It's a classic in almost every regard. This version of "M" is an interesting and largely successful attempt at adapting the themes and ideas of the original to Los Angeles, and to 1950s Hollywood. Naturally there are some weaknesses, but the movie is brisk and engrossing, and certainly doesn't deserve the obscurity into which it has fallen.

Some condemn the film merely for being a remake, but remakes have always been a large part of movie history. There's little reason to object to them, especially now that the original films tend to be available on video. (In the 1930s-50s, originals were generally withdrawn.) If the remake is good, then hooray, there are now two good movies on the subject. If it's bad, then the remake will soon be forgotten.

Saw this movie last night for the 1st time. I was impressed with whole remake of the original except the VHS video picture quality was quite poor!! I hope they hurry up and get this in a DVD format with clearer, sharper images!! The acting of David Wayne as the "baby killer" was great as was Howard DeSilva's "chainsmoking" police investigator and Martin Gabel's crime boss, and look closely for Raymond Burr's tough talking "goon" who is following orders from the crime boss. Really great overall performances from all involved also including Steve Brody, John Miljan (as blind man....where are all the women in this picture except the children!! No leading actress was featured. Photography on location with excellent use of the moving camera was really eye-filling!!! The fat, laughing lady and those floating balloons were part of the tension and irony. Great movie!!

Wow. This is a really under-sung, but still great remake of M.

Like anyone else, I assumed this would be an inferior version of the Lang classic, but this movie stands alone and takes the already disturbing plot to a very '50's place.

If you're interested in noir, and you're seen the original M, you definitely, so much, HAVE to see this. The performance from David Wayne rivals Peter Lorre's and if nothing else, for you Americans, he is surprisingly sympathetic and relate-able.

The original M is one of the first great thrillers and bridges the gap between expressionism and what would become noir in film. This movie serves an exact opposite purpose - it takes the plot of "M" and does an amazing job of turning it in to a local film that both serves as a great thriller and a great commentary on our society.

A perilous remake ,"M" ,while it's not exactly as startling as Fritz Lang's classic ,is proof positive that all the remakes are not doomed .David Wayne's performance compares favorably with Peter Lorre's,which was not an easy task.The screenplay is faithful like a dog to Von Harbou/Lang's story,itself inspired by a true news item ,the vampire from Düsseldorf.David Wayne ,with his next-door-man look,manages to stay disturbing and threatening ,particularly when he plays with laces and Plasticine figures.The over possessive mother's aberrant upbringing is not passed over in silence ("I'm a man;I'm evil;I have got to be punished!")Losey makes an awesome use of the settings in the last sequences .

Thanks to Losey 's talent ,the Americanization of "M" was a success. Please do not redo now!