凶手就在我们中间

M这部电影主要出现的有三个版本。
最早送德国电影当局审查的版本，是最符合导演用意的版本，117分钟，当时电影的名字叫就Murders are among us，可惜这个版本目前已经找不到了。
最新的版本是109分钟（约110分钟）的，这个是尽最大可能保留原来117分钟的原貌而进行修复整理的版本，也就是CC公司最新出版发行的版本（CC公司之前发行过96分钟的版本）。
第三个版本是96分钟的版本，是当时该片的制片人为了电影能公映，根据送审的版本修改删节之后的版本，这个版本修改了其他两个版本的结局，结局只到了法院开庭审理罪犯的情节，而删了后面三个母亲的场景。而且还对电影中一些导演故意采用默片手法的片段加上了后期配音。也就是这个版本把这部电影改成了现在的名字M。

昨天看了110分钟的版本，可惜了那宝贵的7分钟，否则电影肯定有更独特的味道。
电影拍摄于1931年，正是纳粹主义逐渐要在德国兴起的时代，因此，这部电影当中的一些情节表现往往会被认为是在映射当时的纳粹势力，例如其中的盗贼势力——其实这并不是电影的初衷。这部电影的时代背景正是一战后经济萧条、社会动荡、民不聊生的时代，所以其中的盗贼猖獗可以说是一定程度的客观反映，但电影并没有把这些盗贼作为反面的批判角色，甚至是企图作为一种替代性的权力（替代政府）来描绘，其实这部电影里扮演盗贼的人，很多就是导演弗里兹•朗请来的真正盗贼来参演，而且很多是当时警察通缉的盗贼，可以说这部电影是在和警察打游击的过程中拍摄出来的。电影的起意也在于导演朗的妻子对一个事件的感触——政府在这个动荡社会下的无能。所以，这些抨击政府的无能——司法公权力的严重缺失才是私力救济诞生的土壤（盗贼主持的审判）——才是这部电影明确的主旨。
电影当中警察数月的毫无进展，只会毫无目的的盘问和搜索，以及最后也就是被删节的结尾这些情节都使电影带上了反政府倾向，也使之区别于一般的惊悚片（甚至不适宜归为这类）。结尾处三个母亲面对着镜头哭诉：判决也挽回不了死去的孩子，所以我们还是要依靠自己看好我们的孩子。还有你们……你们。（最后面对观众时说，这里树造了一种人人自危的环境，同时也是对司法无力的谴责）。

电影的一些处理也很令人印象深刻，这是朗的第一部有声电影，也是影史上第一部讲述变态杀手的电影，当凶手第一次现身之前，是一个黑影慢慢呈现在通缉海报上、受害的小女孩面前。这个很写意的恐怖手法不知道使后世多少的恐怖、惊悚片都打上了“影子”的主意。还有女孩遇害时的处理也是非常的简洁——一个皮球滚进画面，一只汽球缠在了电线上。这一手法也是被无数次的效仿。电影还结合了一些默片的处理，罪犯在逃跑和盗贼在追捕的一个阶段完成没有了声音，观众不由自主的把注意力都灌注到了画面上，令人不禁想摒住呼吸（96分钟版给这段配上了配音）。电影采用的1.19:1的特殊比例也使画面产生了很强的束缚感，也使电影的一些场景有非常独特的感觉——仓库、会议室、地下室都显得非常挤压。也许你能从那样的画面里闻到一股烧焦之后烟灰的味道，呵呵。

        Fritz Lang, one of the most celebrated auteurs of Germany's national cinema, lays out a chilling crime story in M(1931). In this provocative motion picture, a search for the cruel child murderer, Beckert, drives the whole city to turmoil. As all members in the city become involved in the search for the criminal, two different forms of human abnormality lurked in the city are exposed: the criminal mentality as well as the conflict between the institutional authority and the general public of which it is in charge. While the search continues, both forms of human abnormality keep growing unchecked; yet, eventually, the citizens identified with such abnormality have to face the catastrophic consequences of their behavior. Through innovative use of sound and provocative editing techniques, Lang points to the city as the foster home of both forms of human abnormality. Furthermore, he invites the audience to question the unforeseen detriments of a city in modernity that all its members eventually have to confront.

        As Lang's first film with sound, Lang ingeniously manipulates this new technology to portray the city as an adoptive home of human abnormality. At the very beginning of the film, before any image appears on screen, the audience first hears a child singing a familiar tune: “Wait, wait just a little while/ then the black man will come after you/ with his little chopper/ he will make mince meat out of you.” According to Todd Herzog, this tune is a homage to the “Haarmann song” that tells the chilling crimes of the notorious serial killer Fritz Haarmann. Herzog believes that this song serves to, “locate M in a specific historical context, the world of the Weimar Republic at the time of the film's release, and to place it in dialogue with that world”(Herzog, “Fritz Lang's M(1931), An Open Case”, P232). Nevertheless, Fritz's use of this song to begin the film allows a different interpretation. As the film begins with the dark screen and the nursery rhyme, an image soon appears in a few seconds. A medium shot locates the source of the sound in the yard of a mietskascerne, where a group of kids are playing and singing. By placing the source of the cruel tune in the mouth of a naïve child, Lang further implies that the modern city has become a sink of iniquity, even for the innocent who have yet to understand the city in which they are situated. The victim of today is just as likely to become the perpetrator in the future.

        Beckert's whistle is a repetition in the film which symbolizes his criminal mentality. Each time when he begins to whistle, the audience witnesses the awakening of the monstrous murderer within him. Thus far, Lang constantly shifts the source of the whistle from on-screen to off-screen; such manipulation of the sound source sheds light on the unlikelihood to locate the specific origin of human abnormality in a modern milieu. In a scene when Beckert stands on the street and looks into a shop-window, the sequence is accompanied with no diegetic sound. All what the audience can see is that Beckert dramatically changes his facial expression when he sees a little girl in the reflection of the shop-window. As the girl walks away, the camera moves out of the shop to the street and captures Beckert staring in the direction that the girl is walking. The audience then hears the diegetic sound of the street traffic, and Beckert's whistle simultaneously joins in as he starts following the girl and walks out of the frame. In the next medium-long shot, the camera tracks the little girl as she walks on the street. The whistle continues in the background; however, Beckert no longer appears on-screen in this tracking shot. While the audience has been led to believe that the whistle comes from Beckert by the previous shot; Lang purposefully leaves the established sound source off-screen in the following shot, which leads the audience to question whether Beckert himself is the source of his abnormality, or if the city is that with which has fostered his brutal crimes.

        Lang further manipulates sound to create off-screen space that contrasts the on-screen image in order to depict another form of human abnormality: the revolt against the political authority. The conflict between the underworld business and the police points to a divergence between the authority and the public, which is previously kept in disguise by a seemingly stable social order. However, as Beckert's crimes disturb the social order and alarm the police, they immediately assume that the criminal must be someone from the underworld, and decide to break the ostensible peace and raid their gathering spots. One night, the police secretly surround one of the underworld's gathering place; in which the entire process is accompanied with no sound. The camera soon moves downstairs into the basement where people in the underworld business gather. As a woman shouts out that the police is here, everyone begins rushing towards the exit to leave the basement. In a medium shot, the camera awaits at the top of the stairs and looks slightly down as everyone starts running towards the camera. Among the frenzied noises, the audience first clearly hears a woman's scream as the policemen yell back at her; yet the entire action takes place upstairs in off-screen space while the shot remains still, featuring the panicking crowds. Soon, the police enter from the lower frame and gradually push the crowds back into the basement for investigation. The image on-screen contrasts the actions taken place in off-screen space; such contrast allows the audience to look beyond the images shown on-screen and picture the entire city, where its underlying instability and human abnormality are close to outbreak due to the police's disruption of a public order that does not solve social problems, but merely hides them unseen.

        Throughout the film, Long constructs several montage sequences which implicitly build cause-and-effect relationships between the modern city and human abnormality. In the beginning of the film, when Elsie's mother becomes worried about Elsie for having not returned home, a medium shot shows Elsie's mother walking towards the window and looking out. When she begins calling out “Elsie”, the image cuts to an aisle shot of the stairwell in the Mietskaserne. As the mother's cry echoes down the stairs, the audience then follows the camera to an empty space where people in the neighbourhood hang their laundry; Elsie is still absent on-screen. The sequence continues as it cuts to a close-up on the lunch table, where Elsie's seat remains empty. The grieving howl of the mother has now ended, yet the sequence did not until the audience are shown with two more shots: Elsie's ball rolling on the grass, and the ballon that the criminal Beckerd bought for Elsie entangled in the electric wires on the city street. In this sequence, Lang juxtaposes the mother's continuous calling for Elsie with discontinuity editing of on-screen images. The audience follows the mother as she searches for Elsie in all public spaces in the city where Elsie can possibly be; yet Elsie's ball and ballon at the end of the sequence tell audience that Elsie must have already been slaughtered by the murderer Beckerd. In this sequence, Lang associates the befalling of Elsie's tragic death with the city itself: the development of the modern metropolis not only enlarges the public space, but also catalyses crime and threat among the citizens.

        In another scene when the minister condemns the police chief on the phone for the police department's incompetence in finding the killer, Lang edits a flashback as the chief explains their difficulty. The editing of this flashback again connotes the unforeseen detriments of a city in modernity. When the chief tells the minister about a white paper bag that they found behind the hedge, a close-up on the paper bag gives the audience a clue that it is a candy wrapper, and the store's name was on the wrapper. Then, the image cuts to a close-up of a map of the city, in which circles and circles are drawn with a pair of compasses in increasing radius. While the search widens, the police interrogates owners of candy stores all over the city. However, all owners shake their heads and cannot remember who had bought the candy for little Elsie. As population increases, the city provides perpetrators the opportunity to disguise their abnormality and let it grow unchecked. The editing of this sequence connects the failure to identify the abnormal with the city itself.

        Lang further implies a cause-and-effect relationship between the city and another form of human abnormality, namely, the public and the institutional authority's revolt against each other. As both the leads of the underworld and the chiefs of the political institutions gather for two separate meetings to discuss their objectives on the case of Beckert, Lang uses cross-cutting to juxtapose both meetings. The heads of the underworld complain about the consistent police raids' harm to their business and decide to find the killer by themselves in order to resurrect their business. As the underworld head waves his hand, the shot cuts to the head of police's same action. The police simultaneously decides to continue their search for Beckert without the help of the public, by organizing more police raids and search among public spaces. While the underworld condemns the police for interfering the underworld's business, the police chief Lohmann also refuses to ask the public for help as he states, “Don't talk to me about the public helping, it disgusts me.” The cross-cutting technique invites the audience to contrast the underworld and the police's conflicting attitudes against each other. Such social conflict is another form of human abnormality that is against the democratic ideal of the Weimar republic.

        As the underworld collaborates with the beggars and has seized Beckerd from the building, together they leave the scene in a hurry. Lang then presents the audience with a montage sequence in which he rewinds the crimes that the underworld has just committed. The audience follows the camera into the room where both watchmen have been knocked out and tied up. Then, the sequence continues with still shots of the forcefully broken office door, the compartment's broken fences, and ends with the hole they have dug on the floor in order to make the crime scene look like a result of burglary. This montage sequence is shown with no sound, leaving the audience in contemplation of the underworld's motive and the destructions their abnormal behaviors have caused. The heads of the underworld are provoked to capture Beckerd not because that they find Beckerd's behavior immoral, but because the underworld's business is interrupted by the police's consistent raids. In turn, they decide to look for Beckerd without collaboration with the police, and purposefully commit a series of crimes in order to achieve their goal. The lack of stability in the city's social order has fostered the formation of the underworld, and the underworld's distrust with the political authority. Yet, their abnormal behaviors will lead them to their final conviction.

        The film ends with the final conviction of both the underworld and the child murderer. The audience should not forget that it is the underworld, despite their unrighteous motives, who has asked for help from the beggars and successfully seized Beckert. Nevertheless, both parties have to eventually face the catastrophic consequences of their abnormal behaviors. The first being the underworld's imprudent disruption of the public order for their own economic benefits, and the second being the brutal crimes that Beckert has committed. Throughout the film, Lang manipulates the sound effects and the editing of the sequences to point to the modern city itself as the very cause of all forms of human abnormality preeminent in it. The diegetic world in the film, which is the Weimar Republic in the 1920s, still echoes the modern milieu in which we live. However we try to trace any form of abnormality that hinders the public order, we are always led back to the society as the cause, without identifying the specific origin. Perhaps, the only way of prevention lies in the hands of the people who make up the society, with self-awareness of their behaviors, and positive objectives to make changes.
 
 
                                      Works Cited
 
Herzog, Todd. "Fritz Lang's M(1931): An Open Case." An Essential Guide to Classic Films of the Era Weimar Cinema. Ed. Noah Isenberg. New York: Columbia University Press, 2009. 291-309. Print.
 
M. Dir. Fritz Lang. Perf. Peter Lorre, Ellen Widmann, Inge Landgut. Criterion Collection, 2004, DVD.
 

  这部片子的名声实在不小，当然了，它头顶上的便签个个都是闪闪发光：表现主义大师弗里茨·朗加上“世界上最好的演员”彼得·洛，再加上真实事件改编，加上第一部连环杀手电影，加上IMDB TOP排在#56，最后再加上弗里茨·朗的第一部有声片，没有理由不相信这是一部值得好好玩味的电影。
  但是我错了，以上的所有头衔都不足以概述[M]的根本内核，在最后一场戏到来之前，我一直以为这就是一部讲述30年代变态杀人魔的有声片而已，但是一场来自黑帮的审判生生地把这部110分钟的黑白电影提升到一个绝非任何一部当代电影可以小看的地步，从[大都会]到[M]，弗里茨·朗越发走向人的内心。
   但是首先，不可回避的是，这的的确确是弗里茨·朗的第一部有声电影，技术的革新往往是最基础和决定性的。不过严格一点说，很多声音元素还是缺乏的，甚至到大部分情况下，声音只单纯作为画面的解释而存在，弗里茨·朗似乎相当不放心声音的表达作用，在好几处都给声音加上画面来表达，比如警长在看关于抢劫案的口供时，对于现场的再现其实是声画重复的表达。其次，所谓“有声”，更大程度上只是“有对白”，早期有声片最直观地意识到了语言可以直接参与影片，但是还没有加入音效，除了对白，汽车，街道，道具，很难听到环境的音效，当然更不用说表现性的音效和音乐了。再次，音画同步看起来还是一个恪守的原则，一个声音对应一个画面，所有的声音都是当下的写实的，于今看起来还真是难得的感觉。
  当然说回来，这几点仅能作为对今昔电影的声音运用作比较而言，在有声电影仅仅出现4年之后，弗里茨·朗就给出了这样一部音画结合的佳作，已然难以想象，况且[M]中还有一个重要的声音元素，那就是凶手所哼唱的那首[皮尔金特]，再次提出，那是在1931年，弗里茨·朗让一个杀手哼着歌去杀人，并且让这个关键性的元素——在情节上和听觉上都同样关键——重复出现，要知道，用哼着歌杀人而给人留下深刻印象的办法来塑造变态杀人魔形象，至今还是屡试不爽的经典。（例子就不用举了吧）
   除去声音之外，最后5分钟的审判，黑帮对于杀人犯的审判，以及那个辩护人所说的，“没有人可以杀了人不负责，一个国家也不能”，这之中所表达的政治司法观念，甚至对于人权的思考，只消联系1931年的德国现实，也不难略知一二。

http://axinlove.com/2010/04/m/

《M[凶手M]》表现主义
by @xinl.ve 100406

杰作，推荐一看，但不能理解为什么能位列Top 250: #56。

在艺术的表现力和电影理应具有的戏剧性与趣味性来看，《M[凶手M]》臻至极致。数十年后，Guy Ritchie的极具风格化的摄影、叙事等技法，本片导演Fritz Lang[弗里茨·朗]和拍摄《Sunrise：A Song Of Two Humans[日出：二人之歌]》的茂瑙早已为之，特别是Fritz Lang拍摄的本片，“没有”过分玄乎的宏大主题，《M》单凭表现主义的风格登上了荣誉之巅。

借一段文字：
表现主义电影折射了当时的德国，同时也超越了当时的德国。他们思考的驱动力来自于战败后德国破败的现实，工业社会的冷漠资本膨胀对人的异化塑造了他们思考的姿态——面向共同的人类精神世界发问。在表现暴力、谋杀和死亡的主题时，表现主义电影导演们无不倾向于在影片中制造出一种迷幻、扭曲和阴冷的世界。对于这样一个世界心怀恐惧是全人类的共性，在这样一个世界中逃亡出去寻找精神的安慰之地也是全人类的愿望。当时的德国中产阶级对现实不满，带有自由意志论的时代精神和社会反叛助长了表现主义的发展。参加表现主义运动的人，在政治信仰和哲学观点上存在着很大的差异。其中有无政府主义者、虚无主义者，也有社会主义者。因此，表现主义运动从来不是一个完全统一协调的运动，也很少有始终如一的“纯粹”的表现主义者。但他们也有一些共同的思想倾向和艺术特点，即不满社会现状，要求改革，要求“革命”。

按照上一段文字，《M》已经隐喻着因第一次世界大战的失败而陷入萧条的德国社会有迎来纳粹极权的可能，加上《Das weiße Band[白丝带]》的推波助澜，《M》的题旨好像真是如此。按照部分电影介绍的说法，柏林的警察历经数月抓不住诱拐小孩子并杀害之的罪犯，无奈的普通人（电影中实际是黑帮组织乞丐、小偷和混混等违法之徒，真实世界里少数演员还有被逮进去的情况发生）只好自己组织起来行使正义，“In the name of the law/people”。政府无能，老百姓有力，革命来改朝换代是可以的，《M》因此暗示了德国纳粹的登台。并且导演Fritz Lang为了警示这种危险，在最后结局时，让某个悲伤的母亲说，“看好自己的孩子！”为什么要看好自己的孩子？既怕被拐走（被杀），也是怕被诱骗（成为纳粹）。

过分的解读莫过于此，多少人真看出了晦涩的《Das weiße Band》背后幼年纳粹的成长，抱着自己创造的幻觉可能误读了《M》。

忽视警察为抓捕变态凶手M付出的努力，并把抓获罪犯的功劳归功于黑帮代表的普通人，从而强化“人民行使正义”的电影主题，一厢情愿地厉害。黑帮分子要找出凶手的动机是因为警察的扫荡和宵禁政策极大地影响了他们的生意，并不是真要为民伸张正义。独立于黑帮分子找寻线索的警察并非想象中无能，在嫌犯的住处搜寻到香烟、铅笔屑，并在其家中设伏等待其回家后抓住之。在黑帮分子抢先一步带走凶手后，两个警察一个白脸一个红脸地唬骗被落在办公室的倒霉蛋，从而获悉“普通人”一伙审判罪犯的场所。等等诸如此类，描写政府、警察一方的情节，说明他们的效率其实还是蛮高的，并非电影的反面人物或者参照物。

召集法庭并为嫌犯指定辩护律师的最后一场是电影的高潮。“民意汹汹”的“小偷小摸们”在地下世界一本正经地采用了世俗里的法官、辩护、控方和评审团的形式，要以师出有名的方式判处宣告嫌犯有罪。如此的安排，的确会让人误以为导演站在了人民的一边，然而联想表现主义电影中黑色、夸张、荒诞和颠覆性。正常的“形式”与风格化的电影格格不入，黑帮审判凶人的场景才是异常里的正常。

截两张图，顺便参考表现主义的特点：





1.影像：表现主义的导演注重具有象征意味的造型，倾向认为电影的影像应该成为平面艺术。在构图和布景上下足了功夫。往往在一个构图中用相似的形状并列而形成相当具有表现力的镜头。表现主义电影经常摒弃常规的影像形态，采用倾斜、颠倒的影像，采用常规电影很少使用的特殊拍摄角度，画面的明暗反差一般会很大。表现主义电影常用人物特写和富有象征意义的空镜头，使用特写可以看作是在“放大”表演，增强戏剧性；而对环境的渲染可以看作是对人物行为和灵魂的“解释”，力图揭示人物行为背后的社会诱因。此外，主观镜头也是表现主义常用的手法，表现主义艺术家轻视局限于客观的写实，强调表现“主观的现实”。

2.表演：表现主义的表演一般比较夸张，基本放弃了写实主义的表演方式取而代之的是展示迅速的变动、舞蹈般的动作、变形或扭曲的表情。

3.题材和类型：在表现主义的代表作品中，题材的特征是显而易见的，恐怖、灾难、犯罪题材是最常见的，表现主义电影艺术家们往往从被扭曲的、阴暗的世界中去寻找素材，在那似乎与现实隔绝的、封闭的世界中，去挖掘人物内心深处的孤独、残暴、恐怖、狂乱的精神状态。内容荒诞离奇，有时结构散乱，情节变化突兀，故事人物类型化，往往鬼魂与活人同时出现（《吸血鬼》等），生与死、梦幻与现实之间没有明确的界线。表现主义电影导演们关注畸形社会中的心理非常态，关注那些焦虑与紧张的情绪，力图透视那些狂乱行为背后的深层动机和原因，用主观化的影像风格来反证社会事实，作品因此具有社会意义和社会价值。

56的排位，有了些许答案。

M.1931.720p.BluRay.x264-SiNNERS