4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :- "L" Before "M", 21 April 2008
Author:
David H. Schleicher from New Jersey, USA
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
In an eerie propagandist fashion, the phrase "in the name of the Law"
is repeated over the last two scenes of Fritz Lang's "M" as a child
killer is brought to justice. If "L" represents the State and the Law,
then "M" is meant to represent the Individual (who in this case is a
Murderer). Lang boldly asked us way back in 1931, whose rights come
first: the State or the Individual? A master of his craft, Lang leaves
the question open-ended and let's the audience decide.
"M" is shockingly contemporary in its psychological complexities. It
explores the psychology of individualism vs. group think while
showcasing how a state of fear can be inflicted upon a populace when a
government fails to protect society from a single individual
terrorizing the people. The story is fairly straightforward: An elusive
citizen begins killing innocent children in a large nameless German
city. The media fuels a paranoid frenzy that incites the public. The
clueless police begin to raid "the underworld" after the populace is
turned into a raving mob because of the failure to capture the killer.
"The underworld" comes to a screeching halt as their business is ruined
by the police and starts their own manhunt for the killer.
Unlike a modern period piece that attempts to evoke a certain place and
time, "M" WAS a certain place and time. Lang, in an almost prophetic
sense, captured the state of mind of the German people in 1931 as the
Weimar Republic was on the brink of collapse and the Nazi Regime was
preparing to take over. When individuals live in a state of fear, as
they do in "M", society collapses and the Individual is crushed. Only
the State, it seems, can bring order.
"M" is a also a masterpiece for its technical aspects. The way in which
Lang uses his camera to move through windows, capture shadows,
reflections, empty spaces, and shift points-of-view is staggering even
by today's standards. He also played with the new technology of
recorded sound with extensive voice-over narration and dialogue used to
overlap and transition between scenes. Didn't critics recently praise
"Michael Clayton" for utilizing just such a technique as if it was
something revolutionary? One can also see a protean style the would
eventually birth the Film Noir movement with the creation of tension
and suspense in the use of shadows and camera angles.
Yet "M" is not perfect. It has some major flaws. There are no real
"characters" in the film to speak of in the modern sense. The film is
virtually all built around mood and plot. The only time Lang invites us
to emotionally connect is in the opening and closing scenes with a
mother of one of the victims, and in the classic scene of Peter Lorre
giving his writhing and primal "I can't help it!" speech in front of
the kangaroo court of criminals. The mother's grief and Lorre's madness
are presented so sparsely and in such a raw form that it becomes too
painful to want to connect with them. Another flaw that is often
overstated about films from this time period is the slow pace of the
early police procedural scenes. These inherent flaws combined with the
inherent brilliance of Lang's vision make "M" one of the most
challenging films a modern viewer could ever sit through.
What impressed me most about "M" was the subtlety of the symbolism Lang
created with his haunting images. As harrowing as the story is, none of
the gruesomeness is shown on screen. It's all transmitted to the viewer
through the power of suggestion. Is it any wonder Hitler wanted Fritz
Lang for his propaganda machine, which thankfully led to Lang fleeing
to America? I'll never forget the wide shots of the kangaroo court (and
the looks on those people's faces as the killer is brought down the
steps for trial) or the vast expanse of that empty warehouse. The scene
of the ball rolling in the grass with no one to catch it, the balloon
caught in the telephone wires, and the empty domestic spaces the mother
has to inhabit after her child has been murdered are the types of
scenes that tape into Jungian archetypes and shared fears. The look on
Lorre's face as he confesses, the hand of the Law coming down to save
Lorre from being lynched, and the ghastly plea from the mother in the
final scene will stick with me for the rest of my life.
"M" is a communal nightmare; one that from which we have yet to awake.
at Internet Archive

Buy it at Amazon Rent it at blockbuster.comDiscuss in Boards More at IMDb Pro Add to My Movies Update Data
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv scheduleAwards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summaryplot synopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotesFun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsIMDb user comments for
M (1931) More at IMDbPro »
4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-

"L" Before "M", 21 April 2008
Author: David H. Schleicher from New Jersey, USA
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
In an eerie propagandist fashion, the phrase "in the name of the Law" is repeated over the last two scenes of Fritz Lang's "M" as a child killer is brought to justice. If "L" represents the State and the Law, then "M" is meant to represent the Individual (who in this case is a Murderer). Lang boldly asked us way back in 1931, whose rights come first: the State or the Individual? A master of his craft, Lang leaves the question open-ended and let's the audience decide.
"M" is shockingly contemporary in its psychological complexities. It explores the psychology of individualism vs. group think while showcasing how a state of fear can be inflicted upon a populace when a government fails to protect society from a single individual terrorizing the people. The story is fairly straightforward: An elusive citizen begins killing innocent children in a large nameless German city. The media fuels a paranoid frenzy that incites the public. The clueless police begin to raid "the underworld" after the populace is turned into a raving mob because of the failure to capture the killer. "The underworld" comes to a screeching halt as their business is ruined by the police and starts their own manhunt for the killer.
Unlike a modern period piece that attempts to evoke a certain place and time, "M" WAS a certain place and time. Lang, in an almost prophetic sense, captured the state of mind of the German people in 1931 as the Weimar Republic was on the brink of collapse and the Nazi Regime was preparing to take over. When individuals live in a state of fear, as they do in "M", society collapses and the Individual is crushed. Only the State, it seems, can bring order.
"M" is a also a masterpiece for its technical aspects. The way in which Lang uses his camera to move through windows, capture shadows, reflections, empty spaces, and shift points-of-view is staggering even by today's standards. He also played with the new technology of recorded sound with extensive voice-over narration and dialogue used to overlap and transition between scenes. Didn't critics recently praise "Michael Clayton" for utilizing just such a technique as if it was something revolutionary? One can also see a protean style the would eventually birth the Film Noir movement with the creation of tension and suspense in the use of shadows and camera angles.
Yet "M" is not perfect. It has some major flaws. There are no real "characters" in the film to speak of in the modern sense. The film is virtually all built around mood and plot. The only time Lang invites us to emotionally connect is in the opening and closing scenes with a mother of one of the victims, and in the classic scene of Peter Lorre giving his writhing and primal "I can't help it!" speech in front of the kangaroo court of criminals. The mother's grief and Lorre's madness are presented so sparsely and in such a raw form that it becomes too painful to want to connect with them. Another flaw that is often overstated about films from this time period is the slow pace of the early police procedural scenes. These inherent flaws combined with the inherent brilliance of Lang's vision make "M" one of the most challenging films a modern viewer could ever sit through.
What impressed me most about "M" was the subtlety of the symbolism Lang created with his haunting images. As harrowing as the story is, none of the gruesomeness is shown on screen. It's all transmitted to the viewer through the power of suggestion. Is it any wonder Hitler wanted Fritz Lang for his propaganda machine, which thankfully led to Lang fleeing to America? I'll never forget the wide shots of the kangaroo court (and the looks on those people's faces as the killer is brought down the steps for trial) or the vast expanse of that empty warehouse. The scene of the ball rolling in the grass with no one to catch it, the balloon caught in the telephone wires, and the empty domestic spaces the mother has to inhabit after her child has been murdered are the types of scenes that tape into Jungian archetypes and shared fears. The look on Lorre's face as he confesses, the hand of the Law coming down to save Lorre from being lynched, and the ghastly plea from the mother in the final scene will stick with me for the rest of my life.
"M" is a communal nightmare; one that from which we have yet to awake.
203 comments in total
Add another comment
Related Links