M
There is
something monumental about one-letter titles. As if saying that with one letter
we have said it all, it is enough, the associations generated speaks for
itself.
Of course
it is far-fetched, but if one movie deserved such a monument it would be “M”.
I can just
as well say it right away: Among the 100 first movies on the list this is my
favorite. On any scale it is a top ranker and I know I am not the only one with
high regards for “M”.
What is
then so special about “M”? Is it not just another crime flick?
With an
overbearing smile I shake my head: No no no no, “M” is truly special.
“M” was, I
believe, the last movie Fritz Lang made before he left for America. Ironically
the reason was that it was rumored that Hitler wanted him to be his director,
so it was time to leave Dodge City. Ironically, because Lang in his movies and
particularly in “M” is quite anti-fascist. Hitler was just too stupid to see
that.
Fritz Lang
was part of the highly skilled group of German directors who trained in the
German expressionist school were able to tell stories on many levels even
simply through the cinematography. This is done extensively in “M”, so that the
ambience is dense. The fear and anguish when the mother at the opening of the film
waits for her little Elsie to come home and it dawns on her that she may have
been taken by the murderer. Or the desperation of the law enforcement when they
are getting nowhere no matter how much they try.
The city is
haunted by a child murderer, Hans Beckert (Peter Lorre), who mysteriously
spirits away children. We do not see him commit the acts, but when we hear him whistle
Grieg’s “I Dovregubbens Hall” we know he is on the prowl, and the neck hairs
start rising. We want to scream to the child to get away from the monster, but
in the end we just see the toy roll away and we know it is too late. This is so
skillfully done that it is just as effective today for a jaded audience as it
was in 31.
The city is
working itself into a frenzy over this child murderer. Really the worst threat
is a threat to our children. Who is the murderer? It could be anyone. Somebody
a little too friendly to a child and he is immediately a suspect and the
parents guard their children from just about everybody. Pedophiles are just
about the most horrible kind of people, but today we a frequently hit by
pedophilia hysteria not unlike what we see in “M” and it is incredibly
destructive to the cohesiveness of society, but a total disaster for those
falsely accused. The libel of a suspected pedophile is unshakeable and
guarantees isolation.
The police are
totally upbeat about it. With German thoroughness they literally comb the city
for any trace of the killer. Lack of success just makes them even more thorough
and the people who take the brunt of that effort is the criminal underworld. The smugglers, thieves, bootleggers and
gangsters are feeling threatened by all this attention from the police. They
figure it is the murderers fault so the solution must be to get him out of the
way. He is ruining it for everybody. In a spectacular scene we switch back and
forth between a police planning meeting and the war council of the gangsters
and they are saying exactly the same things. If this is to indicate that the
police are using gangster methods or the gangsters have taken over from the
police I do not know.
In each
their ways they are now getting somewhere.
The police find
out who he is, not through a massive and brutal police effort, but through
classic detective work, by being smart.
The
gangsters set the beggars to look out for the murderer. They can cover the
entire city and nobody takes any notice of them. And true enough soon they got
him spotted. One of the beggars plant a chalk “M” on his shoulder and now his
is literally a marked man.
Beckert
flees into an office building and the gangsters now make a veritable heist to
get to him. This is definitely one of the many highlights, like an early “Ocean’s
Eleven”. They get him and take him to a court of their own to judge him. Here
we have one of the most talked about scenes of the movie. In this mock court of
law Beckert admits to his crimes, but still pleads innocent. He has no control
of what he is doing. How can he be punished for something he cannot control? They,
the judges, they are criminals by choice. They could stop any day, but do not.
Who are guilty here? Who are they to judge him?
Just when
we thought this was as simple crime case it is turned upside down, because we
too are busy judging him. Do we buy his defense? Against such crimes is there
any defense and would we listen to it?
“M” is
expertly made. It is innovative in many ways, but it is the shear suspense and
imagination by the director which drives the movie. And the relevance. That has
not changed. The fear, the hysteria, the overzealous police, the eagerness to
judge and of course criminals who threaten our children.
But man,
you get smoker’s lungs just from watching it…
SUCH a stunning movie. So glad you're just as thrilled with this one as I am. I love the use of Grieg in this movie; very very scary, just as you said. "M" is an old movie that feels like it was far ahead of its time.
ReplyDeleteIndeed. This is one movie I return to gladly. I have been showing "M" for relatives and they were equally into it. It is not just for vintage enthusiasts like me.
DeleteOne of the things I love about this movie is that Lang starts to play with sound not as the new, exciting thing in film, but as another tool in his toolbox. Most directors were so excited by the advent of sound that they didn't look into it as anything more than what it is. But Lang played with it, announced characters with it, and even included sound-based jokes in this film.
ReplyDeleteBeyond that, how gutsy is this film? How radical to attempt even in this slight way to make a child killer sympathetic?
Yes, exactly! This is so much more than just a crime flick. It went new ways, explored the medium and the story in ways that were unheard of at the time and in case of the story are rare even today.
DeleteGood review. As you read in my recent review, I felt this movie was decades ahead of its time. I agree that the trial scene is the best part of a great movie.
ReplyDeleteYes, I totally agree with your review. In fact I needed to put a bit of distance to it or I would just have copied it.
DeleteLang was very deft at using symbolism. The story is gripping, too. Unfortunately for Peter Lorre this film pigeonholed him into playing creeps for the rest of his career.
ReplyDeleteYes, he got typecasted, but then again, he was an excellent creep.
Delete