M serves as an unintentional bridge between the silent era of Battleship Potemkin, and next week's super talkie The Philadelphia Story. This works well, as M's director, Fritz Lang, used M to experiment with new sound technologies that began to emerge after The Jazz Singer took off in 1925 (see "For Further Reading" below). "Talking pictures," once considered a fad by film studios, became a monumental part of the cinema experience. Now, not only can we see pictures move on a big screen, but we can also hear the actors talk and audibly interact with their environments in new and exciting ways. Although we take it for granted, this was revolutionary when it was first introduced to the public.
 |
| Fritz Lang |
 |
| Peter Lorre as Hans Beckert |
Fritz Lang, a successful silent film director in Germany who produced such classics as Metropolis, announced in 1930 that his new project would be "Murderer Among Us." However, he soon found that no studio space was being allocated for him. Back in the early days of filmmaking, there was no "independent filmmaking" as we think of it today; directors and actors were signed on to major studios, where they would have to make a certain amount of pictures for them before moving on to other projects. Lang, signed with Stakken Studios, asked the head of the group why "Murderer Among Us" was not allowed to film. The answer: the heads of the company said that the Nazi party believed that they were the titular "murderers among us," solely based on the title. Eventually, after learning of the plot, Lang was allowed to move forward with the project, which was retitled to M. Would this project be controversial today? Or is our society so numb to dark violence that a plot involving a child murderer would not seem too extreme?
Many people believe that M is meant to fictionalize the real-life serial killer "The Vampire of Dusseldorf," who terrorized children in a small town during the 1920's. However, Lang made Hans Beckert an allegory for schizophrenia and mental illness in general, drawing from multiple psychotic killers as inspiration.
Speaking of which, how many of you recognized the actor who plays Hans Beckert? He's played by Peter Lorre, one of the all-time great character actors. He was typecast in the role of the creepy villain for several years after this film, most memorably in 1941's The Maltese Falcon. He also appeared in Alfred Hitchcock's The Man Who Knew too Much and, perhaps most famously, Casablanca. (Fun fact: Steven Spielberg was such a big fan of Lorre that he hired Ronald Lacey for the role of the Gestapo interrogator who gets his hand burnt by the medallion in Raiders of the Lost Ark, specifically because he reminded the director of Lorre).
In the film, audiences often find themselves sympathizing with Hans, despite the fact that he's a child murderer. Lang did a lot in the film to make us feel more connected with him than any other character, including the detectives and the gangsters. He even gave the character a signature theme that Beckert whistles whenever he's near (called the "leitmotif"- recognizing a character based on a musical tune; this has been used in operas for centuries, but adapted for film for the first time in M). I see the character as an allegory for addressing mental illnesses better, as he claims to have no control over his urges. However, the FTF class is usually split on how they feel about Beckert. What did you think? What should his sentence have been?
The film was critically well-received in 1931, though many complained about the slow nature of some of the scenes. However, contemporary critics and academics adore the picture, largely because of the ways Hans Beckert progresses as a character, and because of the imaginative terror of his crimes (while we're on the subject, how did you imagine the crimes? Gruesome or not? We don't see anything violent in the film - it's all left to the imagination on purpose).
In terms of cinematic legacy, M inspired the genre of film noir in many ways (a genre we'll talk about later on in the course). Fritz Lang considered it his favorite film because of the social themes of parents neglecting children. Also, recognize the names Quentin Tarantino, David Fincher, or Christopher Nolan? All of them consider M among their favorite pictures. What do you think? How do you like M compared to Battleship Potemkin?
If you liked M, then check out:
Metropolis- Fritz Lang's best movie, and an early science fiction classic. It's remarkably watchable, despite its long run-time and lack of substantial dialogue.
The Jazz Singer- M uses sound in groundbreaking ways, but none of that would have been possible without this first "talking picture". It's a little long, and even more boring, but it's importance on the medium of film cannot be overlooked.
I absolutely loved this film. I never would have imagined that I would have become this infatuated with such a dated film. My favorite genre of films fall perfectly in line with this one and how Fritz Lang used offscreen space to create suspense was incredible. I liked the way at some points there was no sound whatsoever, and I might have thought it was sometimes like that purposely, but other times I questioned if it was because the microphone would not pick up a lot of noises. Also, since it was black and white, the lighting was important to pick up on. Some scenes, it seemed as if they used natural sunlight to film at night, so it got me thinking. It was interesting to see causes of how citizens react to a murder, and how it has increasingly become apart of our culture today. For example, a man was talking to a little girl because he was being friendly and didn't think too much about it. That would have been fine before there was news of a murderer sliding through the streets, but since no one knew who the perpetrator was at the time, the man was ridiculed and thought the worse of. The film had deep meanings behind it the plot, such as the before mentioned scene, and I can see what all the rage was about when Fritz Lang came out this film. Even when the murderer was caught, there was a still-today debatable issue on why he was a killer and if his reason, being mentally unstable, was viable enough to not be executed. I liked this movie a lot better compared to Battleship Potemkin because there was a more clear, drawn out plot. Awesome movie.
ReplyDelete-Alicya Simmons
I really enjoyed this film as well. A lot of modern films and TV shows show absolutely everything, which can become a bit de-sensitizing. I tend to prefer the mystery that Lang's use of off-screen space provides, because on-screen violence doesn't really shock most people anymore. Leaving it to the imagination is a lot more foreboding. And, like Alycia, I appreciated the emphasis on how the city reacted to the murders. Watching everyone turn on each other was certainly an interesting way to approach the situation, as opposed to focusing only on catching the murderer.
ReplyDeleteI also appreciated the very deliberate use of sound. Beckert's tune added to the eery feeling at the beginning of the film, and it was certainly interesting to see how Lang approached sound effects in a time where the use of sound was new and evolving. I enjoyed the moments where he chose to forgo sound, like as we see the ball roll away, or the shot of the street at night before the raid. They added a lot to the suspense of the film and the lack of sound was jarring enough to emphasize how abnormal the atmosphere on the street was.
-Carol Neuhardt
In the beginning, to be honest, I thought this movie was extremely slow. However, my dubious attitude towards the movie had began to subside. As the movie progressed, powerful themes had developed; and, as a result, I liked the movie more and more. The "craftsmanship" was delightful to say the least. From the roaring tempers to complete silence, this movie had all kinds of entertaining sequences. Movies that have a scary bent today should look no further than to this movie. Forget about violence and gore; this movie shows that it can be scary -- yet still have an important theme of understanding mental illness and the judicial system within the western world. We care too much about "putting a person away" in contrast to actually giving them the help they desperately need; it may not considered "sexy;" yet, it shows considerable courage as well as possessing knowledge. The film's lack of violent images leaves it up to the viewer -- instead of the movie depicting it. If anything, this provides a more enjoyable as well as interactive viewing experience. Again, I thoroughly enjoyed this film as it further progressed -- excellent overall with suburb craftsmanship that only gave this movie a more positive light in my opinion.
ReplyDelete- Conor P.
Before I started M, I decided to watch a trailer that was made after the film had been remastered. I and was hooked almost immediately. From the first scene with the children playing in the courtyard, I was impressed with Lang's ability to create atmosphere and pleasing visual sequences. Because there was very little dialogue, I found myself able to understand and relate to different characters more quickly. Lang directed my attention to their clothes, their facial expressions, and their body language to learn their stories. For me as a viewer, it was a much more efficient way of developing both the characters and plot. I also really enjoyed Lang’s used of off screen space, something i have experienced in different films, but have never understood the significance of. This editing method grounded me in the story which felt more like it was expanding around me rather than happening on a television screen. During the movie I felt that I needed to heighten my senses so I could observe every word and sound, and try to decipher where it was coming from or what it meant. The story itself was thrilling and had me completely captivated. I would absolutely recommend this film to people. - Matty Henry
ReplyDeleteM was a film that I surprisingly enjoyed after watching it to its’ entirety. At the start, I was a bit bored by the slow progression of the plot. However, once the storyline began to develop, I became increasingly interested in the plot and the subplots. Lang did a fantastic job integrating many suspenseful aspects that kept me engaged, such as the overarching goal to catch the murderer. And, as others have suggested, at times the absence of sound were almost the “loudest” parts of the film, and suspense was built here as well. The transition from the innocence of a playful child, to that same child’s murder was almost seamless, and I am shocked that such a horrifying storyline captivated me. After reading Conor’s remarks on the film, I completely agree with his insightful interpretation of the judicial system and mental illness. To me, the film was very gory and that was hard to escape. However, reading his post (and all of the others) opened my eyes to many hidden messages that were implicit within Lang’s film.
ReplyDelete-Cal DiJulius
I was not sure if the video I was watching on youtube just did not have sound for copywriting purposes at some points, however, I believe that the moments of silence only contributed more to the sounds that had purpose, such as the whistling. I enjoyed how this film, while about murder, contrasts greatly in comparison with modern day murder films. While today, a film about murder must be mysterious or gory, M is interesting without these elements. There is no question about whether or not Elsie is murdered, the audience as well as the characters immediately know this to be true, or at least that he is in grave danger. I don't know if I ever would have watched this film having only read the description, but I found it very interesting to watch a early horror film and one of the first films with audible dialogue.
ReplyDelete-Sabrina
I thought that this was an extremely inventive way to utilize sound in accordance with offscreen space to make a movie. I really appreciate the creative risks taken with Lang by using sound that did not appear to come from the frame of reference in a shot to create a more immersive scene and story for the viewer. Given that this was at the advent of dialogue that could be heard in film, Lang incorporates this exceptionally well into the movie M and sound plays an extremely important role in the plot, especially in the case of the leitmotif of the whistling of "In the Hall of the Mountain King." It is through this this inventive use of sound that Lang helps to further the medium of film.
ReplyDeleteMatthew Schilke