Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

FrogGlace In other words,this film is a surreal ride.

Alistair Olson After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

Art Vandelay Lots of target hit here: American paranoia over crime and violence (check out the TV police bulletin near the beginning), mob mentality (neighbours ratting on everybody else), vigilantism (a parking garage full of criminals can't wait to lynch the perp), inept cops, scheming mobsters and compliant media. For a Hollywood remake of a classic foreign film this is well above average. Maybe because it's shot as a B movie noir rather than a slick A-list reproduction. OK, sunny L.A. isn't exactly known for its street grit. But the director's choice to show most of the murderer's stalking very nearly as silent film dials up the creepiness despite the sunny skies. The other thing about scuzzy 50s B movies is they couldn't afford shmaltzy scores from A-list composers so these movies, esp viewed in the 21st century, aren't ruined by soaring violins and over-done timpanis, and various other musical tricks used by big-budget directors to tell us how to feel when we watch their movies. The movie hits a bit of a road bump when the flat-foots consult a head-shrink for some 1950s psycho-babble. Thankfully, that's over and done within a minute or two. I bet it was shot and added after the film was finished and cut, at the request of the Hays Office or some clown in the executive suite. I thought the perp's semi-coherent psycho-drivel near the end was quite effectively delivered. I couldn't decide whether the director wanted us to feel sympathy for him, or to show what a load of bollocks psychiatry is. In any event, a compelling ending. I'd like to see it back-to-back with the Frtiz Lang version, which is a nearly perfect film.

Michael_Elliott M (1951) *** (out of 4)A child killer is stalking the streets and soon the police are everywhere trying to catch him. This means that the police are stalking the low-life criminals and the crime bosses grow tired of it because it's costing them business. In order to get their business back, the crime bosses set out to catch the killer.Fritz Lang's 1931 film M is without question one of the greatest and most disturbing movies ever made. This 1951 remake from Joseph Losey went decades without being seen but a recent restoration has it available for fans to finally catch. Is it a worthy remake? It absolutely is a winning gem. Some people have called it a film noir but I really don't agree with that. The film is very much like the original in that it has you who the real monsters are out in the world.This film really shocked me on a couple levels. For starters, this was made in 1951 and I was shocked at how suggestive the material was. The early scenes show the killer stalking various little girls of all ages and race. The film certainly puts it in your face that this is a pervert and it doesn't shy away from this guy being attracted to them. Unlike the first film this one tries to explain why the killer is this way and of course it's the hatred of his mother.The cinematography is a major plus and there's no question that Losey has great control of everything going on. There's a very long sequence inside a shopping center where the criminals are searching for the killer and the way this sequence is edited was just flawlessly done. Another major plus were the performances with everyone from a large role to a small one doing a great job. David Wayne plays the killer and brings a certain coldness to the role as well as a creepy undertone.M has been forgotten over the years due to it being unavailable but now that it's making the rounds I can't help but think that it's reputation is going to improve. It's certainly not on the same level as the Lang film but it's still quite impressive.

DKosty123 This 1951 remake of the Fritz Lang classic of 1931 is overlooked often just simply because of the original. It was banned by the Catholic Decency Board due to subject matter. It is a darned good remake when it is judged on it's own merits.The story setting is moved from Germany to Los Angeles. David Wayne plays the Peter Lorre role with amazing energy. It is a shame this one got so butchered by critics because of the original. It reminds me of Roger Maris getting poor ratings for breaking Babe Ruth's records. He deserves better than he got treated here.If you have never seen the original, you will find this stands on it's own merits. The cast is large and includes some names who would go on to other things after this one. On this first view on TCM I am quite impressed with the film noir quality of the recent restoration of this film. Raymond Burr and William Schalert are in the support for this redoing of the original. It really is so much more.

didi-5 Fritz Lang's classic 'M' back in the 1930s is a well-regarded classic, which brought Peter Lorre to prominence and a career in Hollywood.This film, made twenty years later by Joseph Losey, starred light comedian David Wayne as the child-killer, and has much of the same storyline and set-pieces as its predecessor. But is it any good? It has its chilling moments - notably the ones involving the plasticine figure and the bird at the cafe - and Wayne, in a largely silent part, is surprisingly good. But much of the film is a copy of the original, and this lessens its impact. Also, the character of the lawyer who has gone to drink is too prominent, and the underworld search for the murderer who threatens their operation doesn't quite fit on the mean streets of LA, where it did in Germany.Not as bad as I'd heard, in fact this film is really quite good, but some bad editing decisions (acknowledged at the time of its release by Losey) have done damage. It deserves a nod for unusual casting though.