M

Fritz Lang's classic 'M' back in the 1930s is a well-regarded classic, which brought Peter Lorre to prominence and a career in Hollywood.

This film, made twenty years later by Joseph Losey, starred light comedian David Wayne as the child-killer, and has much of the same storyline and set-pieces as its predecessor. But is it any good? It has its chilling moments - notably the ones involving the plasticine figure and the bird at the cafe - and Wayne, in a largely silent part, is surprisingly good. But much of the film is a copy of the original, and this lessens its impact. Also, the character of the lawyer who has gone to drink is too prominent, and the underworld search for the murderer who threatens their operation doesn't quite fit on the mean streets of LA, where it did in Germany.

Not as bad as I'd heard, in fact this film is really quite good, but some bad editing decisions (acknowledged at the time of its release by Losey) have done damage. It deserves a nod for unusual casting though.

Occasionally gripping noir from noir's golden period. Middle-age loner Harrow (Wayne) is a serial killer of little girls. His sixth murder alarms much of LA, especially the underworld which feels extra pressure now from the cops. As a result, the various gangs organize in pursuit of the killer before he strikes again. But will the cops and gangsters catch him in time.

The movie has many fine touches, except for the final chase whose massive gangland presence without police intervention amounts to a real stretch. Where the film excels is with Harrow alone and acting out his illness. Note how he squeezes off the head of a female doll with a photo of his mother in the background, the significance of which turns up at the end. Also, his caressing of shoelaces from his victims suggests a sexual fetish. As a reader of true crime, I've learned that shoe fetishes are not that unusual-- there seems no end to human oddities. At the same time, there's the telling touch of a little girl's balloon soaring toward the heavens that implies her death at the killer's hands, along with a note of hope for something better. Oddly, actor Wayne has practically no lines until the final segment. There his monstrous nature is somewhat mitigated by a heartfelt recognition of his mother's twisted role that he was apparently too weak to overcome.

Ace director Losey makes good use of the many LA locations including the famous Bradbury building from DOA (1950) among others. And that's along with a number of noirish lighting touches. Too bad Hollywood's notorious Blacklist period sent him into exile in England during probably his most productive period.

Except for Wayne, the supporting cast is not called upon to express much emotion. Thus attention remains on the killer and the little girls he inveigles with toys and goodies. As indicated earlier, the weakest parts are the staging of the gangland mobs that appear to have buried their differences in favor of large uncontested mob action.

Despite the downside, the movie's subject matter challenged taboos of the time and still manages moments of genuine involvement.

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!

If the mastodons over at the House Un-American Activities Committee hadn't enough reason to blacklist Joseph Losey than his remake of Fritz Lang's classic M gave it to them. This is Losey's best broadside against the witch hunts and the blind panic the gripped vast sections of the American public ferreting out Communists and their fellow travelers.

There's a serial killer of little girls operating in a small American city and it's got the police baffled. With conditions as they are the police turning up the heat, organized crime types can't operate so the local Don played by Martin Gabel starts his own manhunt. He can move into places local police chief Howard DaSilva can't.

The killer is mild mannered David Wayne a truly pitiable sort when unmasked. His devolution of defenses is something to see.

Good ensemble cast worked with the leads. A good remake of a classic.

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.