Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.
Brainsbell The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.
Lela The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.
Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.
meathookcinema This film works on many different levels.Firstly, its a cracking horror film/thriller about a child murderer on the loose in the Berlin of 1931. Lang's use of framing and lighting is a revelation and would prove highly influential in the wider medium of film. The film is also an amazing snapshot of at the time, post World War I. A broken down society that is in need of repair with its people looking to different authority figures for a solution.Finally, the film has many things to say about crime and punishment. But it also has a lot to say about justice. The killers crimes are abhorrent but there are no crimes that don't warrant a fair trial. When the baying crowd with murder on its mind needs to satify its bloodlust, will it just be those who are guilty that are next in their sights? This film was made when the Nazi Party were starting to rise in popularity. Which makes this film even braver and brilliant.An audacious, daring piece of art.
roblesar99 Considering the fact that I regard director Fritz Lang's Metropolis as one of the crowning achievements in sci-fi cinema, I expected M to be an early hallmark of the thriller genre. However, while there's plenty to ire about Lang's first "talkie," it doesn't live up to the high standard set by Metropolis. The film follows two distinct groups, one composed of criminals and the other composed of police investigators, as they search for a serial killer of children after he strikes for the ninth time. What's most interesting about the film from a storytelling standpoint is that Lang eschews having a principal protagonist. Instead, Lang presents a three-prong narrative that focuses on Otto Wernicke's Inspector Karl Lohmann, Gustaf Gründgens' The Safecracker, and Peter Lorre's child killer Hans Beckert. Lang's decision to weave three story lines into one coherent narrative is a bold move, especially for a film nearly ninety years old, but Lang struggles just a tad to harness them all, leading to some slack pacing. The structure of the film felt akin to that of L.A. Confidential, but whereas that film functioned as a fascinating three- pronged character study, the characters in M unfortunately aren't as complex.However, it is refreshing to see Lorre receive plenty of screen time, considering his status as the film's antagonist. Most mystery films today spend their entire run time building up to the "big reveal," but Lang's decision to reveal the identity of the murderer halfway through allows for the film to benefit from Lorre's phenomenal acting. Carried mostly by a wide range of facial expressions, Lorre's performance elevates the film to a classic of German cinema. Despite his largely nonverbal performance, Lorre is also the beneficiary of one of the film's highlights: a powerful third act monologue in which Beckert reveals his motivations for the killings. The monologue itself proves magnificent, but I cannot help but feel that it's somewhat ill- conceived. I appreciate the fact that Lang devotes time to developing Beckert, crafting a more well-rounded character as a result, but I cannot sympathize with him. At his core, Beckert is still a child murderer, regardless of the contents of his speech. It almost feels like Lang uses the speech in an attempt to garner some last-minute sympathy for the character, but in that regard, he fails to hit the mark. Additionally, while the film's climax in and of itself is fantastic, the abrupt ending struck me as lazy and rushed. I can understand why Lang would want to leave Beckert's fate ambiguous, but another minute or two wouldn't have hurt.However, the film finds success in a multitude of other areas. For one, the camera work feels remarkably fluid, with Lang and his cinematographer Fritz Arno Wagner pulling off an array of technically impressive crane and tracking shots. Wagner's harsh lighting lends itself perfectly to the film's tense atmosphere as well. Apart from Lorre, the rest of the cast also delivers fine performances. Gründgens has a particularly solid turn as a career criminal driven to capture Beckert for his own sake while Wernicke makes the most of his cunning, unlikable detective. Lang also makes it clear that his career as a filmmaker began in the silent era, experimenting with the presence or absence of noise in certain scenes. The scenes bereft of noise are the most notable, with Lang selectively using them to amplify the tension. Initially, it feels jarring to see dozens of people milling around on screen without the presence of background noise or an orchestral soundtrack, but Lang's directorial skill prevent these scenes from feeling disconnected from the main narrative. Perhaps the main achievement here is that these overtly experimental scenes do not feel overly so.While I expected more from the director of one of sci-fi's most enduring cinematic masterpieces, I enjoyed most of what M had to offer. The cast, especially Lorre, delivers uniformly strong performances, while the film proves technically impressive in regards to its cinematography as well. And like any great thriller, there's also an underlying message that still resonates today, if even it is a bit too on the nose. However, while the film has certainly endured with age and still proves compelling from a mystery standpoint, it fails to reach the level of Metropolis because of Beckert's somewhat questionable characterization and storytelling flaws concerning the uneven pacing and overuse of exposition.Rating: 8/10 (Great)
christopher-underwood There is really nothing that can be said about this groundbreaking film that has not already been said, so just a few impressions on watching this after a gap of several years. This film is almost 90 years old and as the Blu-ray release has reinstated, if that is the word, the silent sequences it is well worth a re-watch. Made at the beginning of sound, this was not made with sound throughout, mainly for financial reasons. These silent ages are difficult for present day audiences but strangely effecting too, especially with such startling images. Overhead shots of streets and people scurrying. Peter Lorre lurking, eyes almost bursting. It is an amazing creation that impresses now, goodness knows what affect it had upon audiences of the time. Even without the nazi connotations, this is scary and worrying stuff. Beggars as detectives, criminals as jurors, it is mind boggling. And for a finale as the 'proper' police bumble about we go underground in the most amazing cave like structure packed with those who will decide the child killers fate, looking far too much like the very people that would drag into oblivion.
Brian Berta Oddly enough, the only reason I watched this movie as fast as I did was because I found its short title to be eye catching while looking for different films to watch. I also like crime dramas, so I decided to watch this movie as I was expecting something Hitchcock-esque. However, I liked it all of Hitchcock's films that I've seen as it's not just a well-made crime drama, but a smart one.A child murderer named Hans Beckert has just killed his third victim, Elsie Beckmann. With little evidence, the police decide to raid and question psychiatric patients with a history of violence towards children. In fear of the police ruining business, an underground boss named Schranker decided to assemble a group of crime lords to start their own manhunt.On the surface, this movie seems like a simple, well-made crime drama. However, the movie has a deeper meaning concerning people fighting against a corrupt environment. The police force in the film were flawed as they staged raids with little to no evidence. They were the reason why the gang lords organized their own manhunt. That manhunt came with its own law force. However, that's not to say that what they did was moral, because they also created an unfair kangaroo court to try Hans Beckert. They were more concerned with killing him themselves rather than turning him over to the police. Despite this, however, the fact that the citizens were more successful than the police in catching the child murderer shows how faulty the actual police force was. Essentially, this film is about a corrupt "law force" forming in the midst of another one.As many other critics have pointed out, Peter Lorre gave a magnificent performance. The reason his performance was so unsettling was how his character turned from a heartless killer to someone terrified by the thought of being killed. The final act where he begged for his life was chilling as we got to see another side of Beckert that we hadn't witnessed before. I don't believe that many other actors would've been able to make that scene work as well as he did. Even though Lorre didn't become truly spectacular until the 2nd half, I wouldn't describe his performance as bland, because he still sent chills down my spine when he would talk to the kids he planned on killing. Also, even his whistling was slightly unsettling. On top of Lorre's great performance, the final act was also powerful as Beckert's monologue for why he kills people is both haunting and thought provoking. The scene also shows the flaws with the court system the criminals established, showing that they aren't any better than the police force in the film.This movie has one of the best openings I've ever seen in recent years. It does a great job putting us right in the middle of the action. It starts off with several kids chanting about a murderer in a courtyard, a scene which shows us how many of the children are oblivious to how dangerous the killer really is. The scene then shows one of the girls coming home when she comes across a wanted poster for the murderer. Suddenly, we witness one of the most unsettling and remarkable character introductions of all time as Beckert's shadow moves in front of the poster. It's a clever way of introducing us to the killer not just because of its creativity, but also because the film doesn't show Beckert's face right away. There are also a couple unsettling shots in the opening that work due to their subtlety such as Elsie's ball rolling out of the bushes and her balloon getting lost in a set of telephone wires.The sound in this film was both impressive and revolutionary. Quite a few scenes stuck out due to their use of sound. An example can be found in the opening shot as we heard a girl talking before the film revealed its first shot. The technique of showing dialogue or sound before a film starts off is still used in movies today such as "Hunger", "The Tree of Life", and "Whiplash". However, a truly suspenseful moment was when Beckert pursued a young girl in the streets. The camera was only focused on her, but we heard Beckert's whistling in the background getting louder and louder. There were other instances in the film which made the camera feel alive. An example of this was how we heard the sounds of different objects before they would come into view. This can be seen in the car horns as we heard them before they entered the shot. It felt like the movie was actually taking place in real time. While this may seem like nothing today, it was really innovative back then. The sound design in the film was way ahead of its time.In conclusion, this movie was a remarkable film. It's both a deep and well-made crime drama which impressed me for a number of reasons. It has a deeper meaning, great acting, a haunting 2nd half, and innovative sound design. A few people criticized the movie for trying to get you to sympathize with a child murderer. However, I don't think the movie is asking for sympathy as much as it is asking for understanding. Regardless, it's one of the best crime films I've ever seen.
