欢迎安装高清版[一起看]电影APP
剧照
剧情介绍
凶手m电影免费高清在线观看全集。
柏林这些天连续发生了多起小女孩失踪事件，最后发现这些孩子都无一例外惨遭毒手。这个专门以小女孩为目标的凶手令到柏林城内人人惊恐，家长都不敢让自己的孩子外出玩耍；警察们更是在社会压力下全部出动，然而却一无所获；连黑道都感到压力了，因为警察们一天到晚找他们麻烦，大大影响了他们的生意。于是黑白两道同时展开了抓拿凶手行动。 最终人们还是从一位卖气球的盲人小贩处获得线索，他曾经卖过气球给于凶手一同前来的小女孩，他根据凶手的口哨声认出了此人经常来买气球。聪明的小贩在凶手背后写了个字母“M”，于是警查们开始追寻这个凶手“M”（彼得·洛饰）。冯梦龙传奇九州海上牧云记青春奇侠命运般的恋爱四大家族之龙虎兄弟经常请吃饭的理事大人小情人2017谍影追凶行尸走肉 第十季拾荒者统治玩命速递：重启之战天生冤家第一季僵尸新人仔絕對不能笑間諜24小時妈妈的男人拳击手的救赎恋爱超男女师姐也疯狂帝国时代富江3：冤有头高个儿999谁是凶手（粤语）活女丧尸夜前女友们的幽灵跨越栅栏残余记忆高地行动御宠娇妃墨尔本风云第五季雨中的请求天与地1993死无对证野兽家族第一季女飞行员出手吧！女生安魂零下的激情花木兰1998爱上冒牌空少瑞奇宝宝绑架老大欲望交叉点
柏林这些天连续发生了多起小女孩失踪事件，最后发现这些孩子都无一例外惨遭毒手。这个专门以小女孩为目标的凶手令到柏林城内人人惊恐，家长都不敢让自己的孩子外出玩耍；警察们更是在社会压力下全部出动，然而却一无所获；连黑道都感到压力了，因为警察们一天到晚找他们麻烦，大大影响了他们的生意。于是黑白两道同时展开了抓拿凶手行动。 最终人们还是从一位卖气球的盲人小贩处获得线索，他曾经卖过气球给于凶手一同前来的小女孩，他根据凶手的口哨声认出了此人经常来买气球。聪明的小贩在凶手背后写了个字母“M”，于是警查们开始追寻这个凶手“M”（彼得·洛饰）。冯梦龙传奇九州海上牧云记青春奇侠命运般的恋爱四大家族之龙虎兄弟经常请吃饭的理事大人小情人2017谍影追凶行尸走肉 第十季拾荒者统治玩命速递：重启之战天生冤家第一季僵尸新人仔絕對不能笑間諜24小時妈妈的男人拳击手的救赎恋爱超男女师姐也疯狂帝国时代富江3：冤有头高个儿999谁是凶手（粤语）活女丧尸夜前女友们的幽灵跨越栅栏残余记忆高地行动御宠娇妃墨尔本风云第五季雨中的请求天与地1993死无对证野兽家族第一季女飞行员出手吧！女生安魂零下的激情花木兰1998爱上冒牌空少瑞奇宝宝绑架老大欲望交叉点
长篇影评
1 ) 几点笔记。
1.该片拍摄与20世纪三十年代，这时候德国刚开始或已经准备走上法西斯主义道路。电影中警民的不和谐实则透视了人民对政府和权威的不信任。其中警察在酒场检查妓女和男人时，是一个比较明显的政治隐喻——在当时社会环境和条件下，男人们并不完全配合警察的调查，就连身份阶层低级的妓女都对警察表现出不屑的神色和嘲笑
2,这部三十年代的有声片是对电影技术的又一次成功的革命性尝试。除了影片中 人物的口哨声等并没有多余的配乐。却能在将近两个小时时间的电影中将情节近乎完美的衔接。
3.警察和黑道分开讨论如何抓捕杀人狂时，用到的交叉蒙太奇清晰无破绽。警察开会是方桌，代表秩序和规则。黑社会成员讨论是彼此围坐在一张不小的圆桌边，在某种程度上象征着与所谓秩序的对抗。具有讽刺意味的是，他们两方讨论的话题一样——将同一人抓获
4.开场小孩们围坐在一起玩游戏的镜头由上至下俯拍，其一可将情节发生的环境进行全面的概括，其二是孩子们缺乏保护意识之下弱小的象征。有趣的是歌谣的内容，弗里茨·郎意味深长的将案情的大致通过歌谣和大人的反应呈现给观众，使观众在几分钟内就知晓了电影是基于怎样的背景和环境进行讲述的。
5.爱丽丝被凶手M带走后，镜头给了爱丽丝家中几处地方的空镜。同景别无技巧剪辑代表一种并列关系，仿佛不用刻意解释，单是从这组镜头中，观众就能明白发生了什么。
6.场面调度。
2,这部三十年代的有声片是对电影技术的又一次成功的革命性尝试。除了影片中 人物的口哨声等并没有多余的配乐。却能在将近两个小时时间的电影中将情节近乎完美的衔接。
3.警察和黑道分开讨论如何抓捕杀人狂时，用到的交叉蒙太奇清晰无破绽。警察开会是方桌，代表秩序和规则。黑社会成员讨论是彼此围坐在一张不小的圆桌边，在某种程度上象征着与所谓秩序的对抗。具有讽刺意味的是，他们两方讨论的话题一样——将同一人抓获
4.开场小孩们围坐在一起玩游戏的镜头由上至下俯拍，其一可将情节发生的环境进行全面的概括，其二是孩子们缺乏保护意识之下弱小的象征。有趣的是歌谣的内容，弗里茨·郎意味深长的将案情的大致通过歌谣和大人的反应呈现给观众，使观众在几分钟内就知晓了电影是基于怎样的背景和环境进行讲述的。
5.爱丽丝被凶手M带走后，镜头给了爱丽丝家中几处地方的空镜。同景别无技巧剪辑代表一种并列关系，仿佛不用刻意解释，单是从这组镜头中，观众就能明白发生了什么。
6.场面调度。
2 ) M is for movie
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。
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。
3 ) In the name of the law
#BFI# #Bigscreenclassics# #111mins# 重看。之前看影片感觉到剧本的优秀，再刷后才发现1931年导演那惊人的镜头语言和剪辑能力。
镜头上，各种前推到特写镜头带来的紧张感，情绪消散后拉所营造的抽离感，还有几幕大远景对于男主所处状态的表达，都很恰当地传递了情绪。中间的追逐戏还有一段儿手持摄影… 真的太强了！更强的是长镜头，印象较深是两场，乞讨者的大本营那段儿长镜头，用来阐述乞讨者组织的纪律性，并且最后的上移借墙面转场也非常惊艳，随后又是利用窗框的构图，前推直接越过玻璃达到画面上的无缝衔接顺联剧情，最喜欢的一组镜头！后面还有对“众生”的审判时仰拍的长镜头，当然大量的脸部特写镜头下德国表现主义所影响的人物带来的夸张的表情被更加夸张的放大，带来的张力也是很强的。审判时俯拍镜头滑过那一排排人物的脸，搭配上头顶灯的效果让整个安静的环境带有极强的压迫感。还有几次空镜也都契合对白的从画面上或回顾或填补了细节。
光影上，印象最深的就是开场那段“M“未露脸的黑影犯罪了，也在结尾处男主的自述中有呼应。其次是最后有黑帮老大们（各司其职非常有趣）代表的“权力”起立对于“M”的审判，黑影也是有很强的指代性。
剪辑上，最精彩的莫过于警察和黑帮讨论时的交叉剪辑，带有极强的讽刺性，
人物上，实际上各个人物是被弱化了，更多的是一种指代性。片中对人物也提前做了铺垫，然最后审判来的时候观众可以“更好的”参与到事件中，以字体推断的病态心理和借由镜子反射到小女孩时压抑不住的情绪为最后的审判做了一个很好的铺垫。而警察，黑帮（尤其是黑帮老大背后那“芸芸众生“）就更加直白了。M被“烙上”印记后的几次被拍肩非常逗趣，从被标记，到被指认，到被辩护，到被法律带走。
4 ) 《M》视听语言分析
开场：东邪西毒里梁朝伟去见当地很有名刀客，刚一到，便知道自己本不该来，因为高手之间，片刻便能分辩对方实力。本片的开头，便是电影高手费里茨 朗的亮剑。镜头一开始，是一个大俯拍镜头，孩子们正在用儿童杀手编成的歌词在做游戏，紧接着镜头摇到了楼上的生气的妈妈，正在责令他们停止。在电影中常遇到交代背景的时候，如果换成其他电影，此时可能是一个画外音在叙说，或者用字幕方式来交代这些必要的信息。而弗里茨朗显然用了一种更高明的手法，将背景交代融入故事当中，让观众知道儿童杀手频繁作案，父母们笼罩在一片恐惧的氛围里。
小女孩遇害这一段有一个关键的视觉元素：时钟。在这一段，墙上的时钟共在这里出现了三次；第一次的时钟指向12点，家中的妈妈露出欣喜的笑，从紧接着的镜头里，我们知道是女儿放学的时间。然而随着凶手的出现，紧张感陡然上升。第二次出现时钟指向十二点二十，按照正常情况，女儿应该到家，然而并没有出现，妈妈更加紧张起来。而作为观众的我们知道小女孩正在跟凶手在大街上玩耍；当第三次出现时钟，上面显示的是一点十五，一个多小时过去了，焦急等待的妈妈近乎绝望，对着窗户外声嘶力竭地喊着小女孩的名字。最后那一组空镜也异常精彩，空空的回廊，空空的晾衣室，空空的餐具，声音在这些地方不断回响，当滚出的气球和挂在电线杆上的气球，我们知道，小女孩不可能再回来了。这一段故事的戏剧张力，从欣喜地期盼，焦急地等待，绝望的呼唤，再到最后结尾的揭晓，完成了整个戏剧的起承转合。
这种用时间来表达戏剧张力的方式，在希区柯克那里发挥到了极致，在几年后拍摄的《阴谋破坏》里将这种时间-悬念运用得相当出色。
M的出场方式：M第一次出现在画面里是以剪影的形式，当小女孩正在看告示时，他的阴影正好落在告示上的“凶手”单词上，接着在下一个镜头带小女孩买气球的大全景是背对着观众，而第三次则是背对镜头伏在窗台上写信的中景。自然这样吊胃口的出现方式让M显得神秘而不可捉摸。
黑老大的出场方式：黑帮召开应对警察搜查的紧急会议，黑老大史林卡迟迟不到。为了突显其神秘和威严，通过他人的议论来表现这个人物，有人说他曾经被重重包围却又怎样潇洒脱身，有人说他是第一高手，通过他人之口，却见其人，便突显其高大。当然，最后在人物出现时，视觉语言就显得弱很多了。
M杀人引发的社会混乱：这一段的各个场景之前用声音紧密地连接在了一起。大街上人潮拥挤在看凶手的通告，后排人员因为字太小看不清，叫前排的人大声念出来，这时候响起了有人念通告的内容。紧接着场景的转换，我们才知道声音原来来自于室内的一个人在大家念报纸上的内容。类似这样用声音来连接场景的方式在《公民凯恩》中得到了更精彩的运用。
《M》中的运用
《公民凯恩》中的继承
两场会议：黑帮和警察同时（也可能不是物理上时间的同时）召开了一场会议，通过交叉剪辑，无论是场景布置的相似，人物动作之间的连续性，都让观众感觉到，他们似乎是一个整体，他们的命运是紧紧连接在了一起的。
黑帮老大的挥手紧接着警察头子的挥手
一个警察坐下接着是一个黑帮分子站了起来发言
5 ) M的意义
这部影片名气太响，可在最后5分钟到来之前，还真是没觉得特别。人物赋予夸张的戏剧性表情，说是惊悚片着力点却不在凶杀，更多描述黑白两道对罪犯的抓捕，就像一场闹剧。这是我看的德国表现主义大师弗里茨·朗的首部影片，“表现主义”可是很厉害的，很前卫，它创立的电影风格已经成为现代电影艺术的常用手法。茂瑙就是我十分喜欢的一位，我觉得他在默片时期已经做完了所有关于电影表现手法的尝试。
说《M就是凶手》十分伟大，因为它是影史上第一部讲述连环变态杀手的电影，弗里茨·朗的第一部有声片。世界上第一部有声片也就诞生在1927年吧，1931年出品的《M》对声效的运用已经十分了得，尤其是凶手哼着格里格的《皮尔金特》诱杀女孩，《皮尔金特》是格里格为易卜生的同名诗剧写的配乐，就讲了一个病态地沉溺于幻想的角色，最终成为牺牲品。
这在当时一定非常里程碑，不过，时间流逝，“第一”会慢慢变成符号，一道考题，一则引用短语，从极具意义到意义的尸体，在最后5分钟到来之前，你仿佛在看一个被后来者抚摸、仿效和取用了多次的纪念品，直到最后5分钟，令我惊叹的5分钟，宣告它永远屹立于伟大作品之林，并且永不褪色。
“初衷”是个挺机灵的小子，常常发觉我们的理解和艺术家的创作初衷不是一回事，不知道是他们故意在戏弄我们，还是我们成全了他们，作品被包装成蕴含无穷深意，访问弗里茨·朗关于《M》的创作想法，他说：“这部电影的要义不在于惩罚罪犯，而是警告母亲们：你们要看好自己的孩子！”对于这个说法，会令评论家大跌眼镜吗？我也想不通这样的创作意图，但按照一般评论的说法，这部影片“黑社会组织严明、私设公堂的做法，更是直指了1931年篡权前的纳粹，放在今天来看，依然具有相当震撼的警世意义”我也觉得太过严重了。
凶手M表现为精神异常，连续作案，杀了八九个女孩子。警方展开地毯式搜捕还是一无所获，在此期间，黑帮老大的娱乐场所屡次受到排查，生意不振，黑帮老大要出击，利用丐帮人肉搜索，先于警察擒获M。最后5分钟开始了，黑社会组织模拟法庭，法官、审判长、听审听众一应俱全，还为M配了辩护律师，开始双方驳辩：
M说：他自己无法控制自己的行为，只要一看到小女孩，他的内心就由恶魔驱使，引导他犯下不可饶恕的罪恶，在那时，他忘记了一切。有两个他在斗争，一个说“你要做”，一个说“你不能”，内心时时备受煎熬；而要裁决他的黑社会都是心智正常的普通人，可以控制自己的行为，却也做着杀人放火的勾当危害社会，到底是谁应该受到制裁呢？
还以为是摆设的辩护律师却异常认真、坚持，他极力为 M 辩护：“因为我的被告在不可抗拒的冲动下犯了罪，所以不该被判处死刑……没有人会因为忍不住的事情而受惩罚……没有人能够把一个不能为自己行为负责的人杀死，这个国家不行，你们当然也不行……应该把他送进医院，而不是监狱或者绞刑架”。
审判长（黑帮老大）说：出院后又开始杀人呢？应该判他死刑……
此刻，围坐着的听众沸腾起来，攻向M，想即刻处死他。
此刻，警察赶到，“救”了M，影片在此高潮落幕，一位母亲呆看镜头“ 这样救不回我们的孩子，我们应该很小心地照看自己的孩子。”（我不太清楚自己看的是哪个版本，据说修复版是加长了法庭戏，是有一场真正法官进行的审判？）
突然之间，一个难题甩到观众面前。《M》的意义出现了。
拼音文字容易凑出点名堂来，譬如钻石的检验就会说用4C标准（Carat、Clarity、Colour、Cut），管理服务要追求5S（safety、standardization……），片名叫V叫M叫Z都可以看作有寓意。
凶手的名字与M无关，之所以说“M就是凶手”，是某人急中生智怕凶手给跟溜了，乘其不备涂在凶手衣服背后的记号，在那个场景中，M就是 murder，但到了（模拟）法庭上，他是一名精神病患者而受法律保护，他将接受治疗而不是处决，大众无法面对法律对他们道德观念的不合作，此时的M就是 moral，法律只在为我所用、为我出头时才受我尊敬，否则就让道德来处死他吧，这才体现公平和公正，镜头扫去，黑社会和受害者家属和一般民众，已经模糊不清。
此时再来看导演颇为奇怪的创作意图“我们应该很小心地照看自己的孩子”（这行字也正是电影放到这时出现的）就会觉得是对社会失控无可挽救（没有小心照看、放任社会走向危险极端）、个体意志与集体利益相处尴尬（个体发疯威胁到群体生命，群体疯狂折磨个体生命）、法律无能道德恐怖（法律只能是最大限度的实现公正，道德能用来杀人）的无奈讽刺了。
据说《M就是凶手》是原片名，制片人获悉希特勒在大选中可能获胜，担心该片被禁，改为《M》，可见，这个M原是不简单；而一部亘古长青的影片必是紧扣人类永恒难解的命题，看电影的同时看自己的。
说《M就是凶手》十分伟大，因为它是影史上第一部讲述连环变态杀手的电影，弗里茨·朗的第一部有声片。世界上第一部有声片也就诞生在1927年吧，1931年出品的《M》对声效的运用已经十分了得，尤其是凶手哼着格里格的《皮尔金特》诱杀女孩，《皮尔金特》是格里格为易卜生的同名诗剧写的配乐，就讲了一个病态地沉溺于幻想的角色，最终成为牺牲品。
这在当时一定非常里程碑，不过，时间流逝，“第一”会慢慢变成符号，一道考题，一则引用短语，从极具意义到意义的尸体，在最后5分钟到来之前，你仿佛在看一个被后来者抚摸、仿效和取用了多次的纪念品，直到最后5分钟，令我惊叹的5分钟，宣告它永远屹立于伟大作品之林，并且永不褪色。
“初衷”是个挺机灵的小子，常常发觉我们的理解和艺术家的创作初衷不是一回事，不知道是他们故意在戏弄我们，还是我们成全了他们，作品被包装成蕴含无穷深意，访问弗里茨·朗关于《M》的创作想法，他说：“这部电影的要义不在于惩罚罪犯，而是警告母亲们：你们要看好自己的孩子！”对于这个说法，会令评论家大跌眼镜吗？我也想不通这样的创作意图，但按照一般评论的说法，这部影片“黑社会组织严明、私设公堂的做法，更是直指了1931年篡权前的纳粹，放在今天来看，依然具有相当震撼的警世意义”我也觉得太过严重了。
凶手M表现为精神异常，连续作案，杀了八九个女孩子。警方展开地毯式搜捕还是一无所获，在此期间，黑帮老大的娱乐场所屡次受到排查，生意不振，黑帮老大要出击，利用丐帮人肉搜索，先于警察擒获M。最后5分钟开始了，黑社会组织模拟法庭，法官、审判长、听审听众一应俱全，还为M配了辩护律师，开始双方驳辩：
M说：他自己无法控制自己的行为，只要一看到小女孩，他的内心就由恶魔驱使，引导他犯下不可饶恕的罪恶，在那时，他忘记了一切。有两个他在斗争，一个说“你要做”，一个说“你不能”，内心时时备受煎熬；而要裁决他的黑社会都是心智正常的普通人，可以控制自己的行为，却也做着杀人放火的勾当危害社会，到底是谁应该受到制裁呢？
还以为是摆设的辩护律师却异常认真、坚持，他极力为 M 辩护：“因为我的被告在不可抗拒的冲动下犯了罪，所以不该被判处死刑……没有人会因为忍不住的事情而受惩罚……没有人能够把一个不能为自己行为负责的人杀死，这个国家不行，你们当然也不行……应该把他送进医院，而不是监狱或者绞刑架”。
审判长（黑帮老大）说：出院后又开始杀人呢？应该判他死刑……
此刻，围坐着的听众沸腾起来，攻向M，想即刻处死他。
此刻，警察赶到，“救”了M，影片在此高潮落幕，一位母亲呆看镜头“ 这样救不回我们的孩子，我们应该很小心地照看自己的孩子。”（我不太清楚自己看的是哪个版本，据说修复版是加长了法庭戏，是有一场真正法官进行的审判？）
突然之间，一个难题甩到观众面前。《M》的意义出现了。
拼音文字容易凑出点名堂来，譬如钻石的检验就会说用4C标准（Carat、Clarity、Colour、Cut），管理服务要追求5S（safety、standardization……），片名叫V叫M叫Z都可以看作有寓意。
凶手的名字与M无关，之所以说“M就是凶手”，是某人急中生智怕凶手给跟溜了，乘其不备涂在凶手衣服背后的记号，在那个场景中，M就是 murder，但到了（模拟）法庭上，他是一名精神病患者而受法律保护，他将接受治疗而不是处决，大众无法面对法律对他们道德观念的不合作，此时的M就是 moral，法律只在为我所用、为我出头时才受我尊敬，否则就让道德来处死他吧，这才体现公平和公正，镜头扫去，黑社会和受害者家属和一般民众，已经模糊不清。
此时再来看导演颇为奇怪的创作意图“我们应该很小心地照看自己的孩子”（这行字也正是电影放到这时出现的）就会觉得是对社会失控无可挽救（没有小心照看、放任社会走向危险极端）、个体意志与集体利益相处尴尬（个体发疯威胁到群体生命，群体疯狂折磨个体生命）、法律无能道德恐怖（法律只能是最大限度的实现公正，道德能用来杀人）的无奈讽刺了。
据说《M就是凶手》是原片名，制片人获悉希特勒在大选中可能获胜，担心该片被禁，改为《M》，可见，这个M原是不简单；而一部亘古长青的影片必是紧扣人类永恒难解的命题，看电影的同时看自己的。
6 ) Tracing Human Abnormality in Modern Berlin
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.
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.
近乎完美，扣一星最后的伪庭审，当民粹已然发展到人人相疑，社会不安时，是无法产生如此模式化的场景的。东方快车式也许更加契合
黑社会对杀人犯的人道和法律审判是很有意思的。真正的执法机构是无能的，但是一个罪犯又有什么权利来说另外一个罪犯是不可饶恕的？尤其是，这个杀人犯在倾述自己的心理病态时，听众席上的若干观众还默默的点着头。终究，这个社会的罪恶似乎是没有出路的，因此才有最后一幕的，父母们应该看好自己的孩子。虽然这最后一句台词真的出现得很突兀和莫名其妙，像是匆忙之间添上去用来过关的。如果没有执法机构的审判和最后母亲的画面，我想这部片子要好得多。
原来，他只是个卖萌大师。中间有一段很惊艳的平行硬切剪辑，瞬间明朗了两个势力、一个目标的局势；想不到在全民哄笑那一刻燃了；最后的辩论虽然升华了高度，但也同时削弱了快感；那支口哨的旋律，忘不得。配乐贫乏、完全依靠影像推进的原味悬疑片，这是黑色艺术品。
【B+】第一次看德国表现主义电影，不负盛名。在许多方面的想法都远远领先于同时代其他影片（尤其是对声音和光的运用），只是毕竟是先行者，已如今眼光再看有些地方还是显得生涩，比如那个平行剪辑，很生硬。
除对白和口哨声外其他声音基本无，更别提扣人心魄的配乐了，但作为一部1931的有声片，如此足矣。有趣的地方在民众对警察（政府威权）的不信任（妓女朝警察啐口水），以及黑道擒获凶手的设定，加上最后私设法庭和真正的法庭审判对比，如此种种真是大胆的讽刺。口哨声很瘆人。
德国表现主义电影向美国黑色电影转变时期的牛逼片子，而且就我目前的阅历来说，它好过所有的德国表现主义电影以及八成的（另两成我没看而已）美国黑色电影，这当中的差距，是巨大的
观感很奇怪的一部电影，就像无声和有声的结合，无配乐仅有图像来烘托情节，前段闷的要死，中段的剪辑很棒，结尾升华主题的对峙是点睛之笔，全片的悬疑点布置出众（说的就是那个口哨！）， 对杀手的人物刻画很深刻（选角！）。（问题：那封信是谁写的？）
弗里茨·朗十分大胆地让一位罪恶滔天的凶犯在大银幕前为自己辩解，凶犯与群众的关系变得十分微妙；朗用一个社会新闻进行了一次政治反思，这是1931年的魏玛德国；按照克拉考尔的观点，M同样预示了纳粹德国的崛起。马克·费罗更认为结局中女人的警告表明朗和他当时的女友Thea von Harbou（后加入纳粹）对魏玛共和国民主的不信任，流露出两人的意识形态（cf.Cinéma et Histoire, 1977）。从以微观的社会事件对社会制度进行宏观的分析角度来看，朗无疑是影史的先驱。
解读一部经典电影就要联系当时的环境，读过福柯的《规训与惩罚》《癫狂与文明》可能对电影中欧洲的法律体系有所了解。其实就剧情来说这部电影很是粗糙，不过最后的审判意味伸长。人权，自由，权利，精神病一系列中世纪的产物柔和起来，这才是这部戏的精髓。
8论底层人民群众社会活动的重要性人民法庭所代表的民声与法庭所代表的正义 情感与理智的对决 谁才是真正的正义30年代就拍出如此前卫的社会题材作品 完爆如今各种院线商业流水线粗制滥造品结尾人民法庭的大法官与激起的群众又或是集体主义兴起的预言与写照
群众大会真牛啊
M逃进阁楼那一段特别精彩！彼得·洛长得果然猥琐！演个绑架小姑娘的变态杀手太合适了！1931年的这部电影现在看来还是有些琐碎冗长！翻拍的话应该不错！
黑白构图的张力，无声与画面的急速运作的对比，轻快口哨和极端反人性行径的并行不悖，空镜头与人物戏剧性夸张表演的穿插。电影在那个有声片刚诞生不久的年代，可以承载太多的艺术手法和社会诘问。如同富士康员工跳楼事件，个体背负社会病是流行于每一个年代的瘟疫。
开场利用影子铺设惊悚氛围、人人自危的紧张空气，与明暗双线并行的抓捕过程构成高反差对比，制造出不少萌点；空无一人的街道，M惊恐的表情，口哨的运用，堪称经典；对连环杀手的心理描摹，以及对法律制度的揶揄，都具有前瞻性。
B＋/ 大半部散点透视无主角剧本，结尾审判似黑化生之欲;超低仰角俯角，移魂般长镜空镜，阴影与光的博弈; 心理音效恐惧感仿佛真空。无论文本还是影像都有新的尝试，昭示着尼伯龙根大都会的默片时代之后似乎稚嫩却更有生命力的弗里茨 · 朗。万万没想到喜剧效果这么出众。可作最近网络话题镜鉴。
每次看德国电影都忍不住往政治隐喻上想，德国真是一个牛逼的国家啊。影史上第一部讲连环杀人的电影，却比后来的那些要高明得多。黑社会审犯人那一段是我觉得电影最好看的一段，“难道把你交给警察送进监狱，让国家养你一辈子?”，警察搜寻许久无果最后由盲人找到了线索，这真是个无比讽刺的故事。
传说中的德国表现主义力作。这种片子放在现在的天朝完胜那些大片。最后的辩论进入了人权、制度和法律的思辨，而他们的概念完全是基于人性的角度，这是人权的思考。前半部的悬疑解惑，后面的基层社会的私设法庭，凶手的经典口哨还有夸张的表情和肢体。经典！8.6
淘到DVD了哈哈
看到底下那么多装逼的评论，心情就像M突然发现身后被标记了白字时那样，好惊悚好害怕！！！！！瞪！！！！！
印象最深的是 他说“你们要是杀了我 你们就是冷血谋杀！” 群众听到后笑了起来；他说“我要求把自己交给警察！” 群众也笑了起来；他说“我要求把自己交给民主陪审团！” 群众还是笑了起来。群众没有兴趣也觉得没有必要听他说些什么 这不重要 “让他死”就是大家坐在这里的目的。M是凶手 而乱审判的群众也是凶手——从个人观点来看 某些罪犯——就如M 单单交给法律来处理是难解自己的心头恨 就应该让他受折磨——但民主审判又不能当主流 如何让法律和民主完美结合这才是国家最最重要的治国之道 最后在法律和人情里留了一个做选择的悬念 大概就是这个意思吧。