M
Thursday, 15 March 2007
Filed in: IMDb 250, Resolutions, Reviews, Top Rated
M (1931, Fritz Lang)

There are many things to marvel at and be impressed with when it comes to this movie. First of all, it’s almost impossible to believe that this movie was made in 1931. Made only a few years after the end of the silent film era, Fritz Lang uses all aspects of sound (effects, dialogue, silence, music) fantastically well. He uses music and complete silence interchangeably to set the mood and unsettle the viewer, to brilliant effects. It’s made even more remarkable when you consider this was his first talkie. It boggles the mind.
In addition to these technically brilliant uses of sound, sound also plays a vital part of the plot. The choice to make a blind man (whose main sense, presumably, would be his hearing) such a pivotal character is truly inspiring, as is the discomforting whistling we are exposed to throughout.
The plot itself had to be groundbreaking at the time, as it still holds up so well today. Peter Lorre has been a favourite actor of mine since I first saw him in Casablanca, but I’ve never seen him so young, or as a lead actor before. He really excels as the child-murderer who can’t control himself.
I also particularly enjoyed the fact that the cops and the members of the criminal underworld are both working towards the one common goal: to get this murderer off the streets. There is of course hypocrisy in this — how can the city’s criminals be so self-righteous, after all the things they themselves are guilty of? There is one particularly memorable scene featuring both these groups. We see them both, separately, making plans for how to catch the killer, and there are several cuts between the two meetings. With each cut, the uncertainty as to who’s who increases, until finally we can’t even tell them apart.
The direction and fast-paced editing is also a thing to behold. It feels fresher and more alive even than some things produced today. Lang maintains a very creepy atmosphere throughout. The unsettling nature of mob mentality is presented in an eerie way, and the disturbed personality of Lorre’s character lends an added layer of unease to the whole thing.
Finally, the conclusion of this movie does not let it down at all. It’s wrapped up nicely, but not too neatly. The final scene has an amazing revelatory shot and Lorre’s monologue is some of the best acting you’re ever likely to see.
This movie absolutely blew my mind. It was a brilliant achievement in 1931, and remains so until this day. Do yourself a favour and rent this today.



(1 vote(s), average: 4 out of 5)
Tuesday, 27 March 2007 at 20:06
It’s amazing Lorre didn’t get more work in leading-villainous roles, isn’t it? I’d imagine he had his choice of roles throughout his career. Just a testament to how often the supporting role is meatier than that of the lead, you think?
Tuesday, 27 March 2007 at 20:14
Yeah, it is kind of amazing. If Humph was here, I’m sure he could shed some light on it.
Was it that Lorre wasn’t offered the roles, or that he declined them for supporting ones, I wonder…
Wednesday, 28 March 2007 at 02:28
Your review is superb — I wish I was eloquent and… stuff. I happened to be searching FW for some movie ratings and stumbled across some of my early reviews — they actually had some meat to them. Guess I was trying to impress the other posters back then.
Anyway, you make me want to rewatch this. I’m glad I bought the DVD for my 2006 Resolutions. This means I can, but who knows how soon :-/
Thursday, 29 March 2007 at 22:58
This is the movie that I learned the term leitmotif. A leitmotif is used to associate a single character with a reccuring musical theme, in this case, Lorre and the whistling of “Hall of the Mountain King”. This was one of the first movies to use it.
Sunday, 1 April 2007 at 20:47
Yeah, I’m aware of what a leitmotif is (we have the same word in Swedish). I think it was used really well. It also helped that I have always (since childhood) found Grieg’s composition awfully creepy.