长篇影评
1 ) 《凶手M》,永不消失的口哨声
原文地址:
http://www.qh505.com/blog/post/1897.html《凶手M》或者是《可诅咒的人》,又或者是《凶手就在我们中间》,《The Murderers Are Among Us》、《Fritz Lang's M》、《M - Eine Stadt sucht einen Mörder》、《M - Mörder unter uns》……不同的电影翻译指向一个共同的符号:M,大写的M,影子的M,犯罪的M,M是小贩涂在手掌上的记号,M是印在凶手肩上的符号,只擦去了一半却永远无法清除,M是以法律的名义受到制裁,还是以人民的名义受到惩罚?
在这无休止的疑问中,只有那口哨声一直响彻在街上,宛如游戏,被消解了。就像影片一开始那些孩子们围在一起玩的游戏,他们唱着那首歌:“他带着刀,把你切成碎片,然后你出局了。”歌声在小区里飘荡,这是可怕的歌,“该死的旋律”,在这歌声中是长长的楼梯,无声的窒息压抑过来,母亲对着窗外叫“爱思”,小女孩没有回来,只有死一般的楼梯,和没有人玩的皮球,以及断了线的气球。女孩爱思贝克曼失踪了,永不回来了,就像这个城市那些已经失踪的8个孩子一样,被口哨声带走了。
留下的只有那个恐怖的黑影,戴着礼帽,而且礼貌地和爱思贝克曼讲话,背影留在“悬赏一万马克”的通缉海报上,口哨声留在街头谱卖气球的盲老人耳中。恐怖的黑影和欢快的口哨声组合在一起,这里没有游戏,只有死亡。凶手是谁,谁是凶手?从游戏开始,是不是要从游戏结束?“糖果、玩具乃至苹果,将生活引向终点。”这是可怕的日子,似乎街上随时都有凶手出现,“坐在你身边的人可能就是凶手”,和小孩在一起的陌生人被怀疑是凶手;在酒吧里的客人被怀疑是凶手,他们一个个被带走接受调查,他们似乎一个个都有污点和被质疑的可能。
当所有人都被怀疑,杀人事件就仿佛变成了集体性行为,而个体被隐匿了。警察局出动了大量的警力,在每个犯罪现场取证搜索,他们发现了皱了的糖果纸,但一无所获;他们搜查了两公里之内的所有咖啡馆,但一无所获;他们一周只睡十二小时,但一无所获;他们抓走了两车嫌疑人员,但一无所获;他们总共发现了1500条线索,“可以装进60本书”,但一无所获。
众多的警力,众多的线索,众多的怀疑,但似乎越来越走向反面,越来越没有价值,目击证人为凶手是否带红帽子还是绿帽子争论不休,他们甚至用“三文治占卜”来推断凶手,一切似乎陷入游戏的困局,但是口哨声依旧响起,凶手在别处。而且可怕的是,凶手还正大光明、胆大妄为地给报馆写信,信里说:“但是我还没有做够。”这是无休止的恐惧,这是无休止的疯狂,警察从凶手的公开信查找指纹,对照笔迹,分析出凶手不连续的字迹表明是无生气的性格,从而得出凶手是一个疯子。他们从监狱、疯人院寻找线索,被治疗又被释放的病人成了怀疑对象,他们装扮成乞丐,他们跟踪每个孩子,他们甚至蹲点在怀疑对象的家里,查找光滑的桌子、废弃的垃圾桶,以及窗台上的铅笔碎屑,但是这些行动并不能获取最有价值的线索,这一切衬托着警察的无能。
而在警察的另一面,黑道也出手了,因为凶手影响了他们的生意。凶手又一次出现在街上,又引诱着一个小女孩,他还是吹起了可怕的口哨,而这次发现的不是警察密布在街上的那些乞丐,是那个卖气球的盲老人听到了这哨声,然后小贩跟踪,他用M在凶手衣服上做了记号,而行迹暴露的凶手最终摆脱了警察雇来的乞丐的追踪,逃进了商业大楼。而这次得到消息的不是警察,而是黑道。他们闯进了凶手躲着的商业大厦,包围了所有的出口,并且通过打昏保安、破坏大楼,终于找到了藏匿在阁楼里的凶手,等警察赶到,人去楼空,只有撬天花板而没有逃走的法兰兹留在现场。警察抓住了这唯一的线索,对凶手M的追查变成了对法兰兹的审问,当卡尔曼督查听到法兰兹说“找到那小孩的杀手”时,叼在嘴里的烟突然掉落下来,卡尔曼像一尊木偶,站在那里半天没有发出声音,那是一种新的恐惧?在警察大肆搜捕而一无所获的结局面前,凶手却被黑道的人抓走了,这是不是对法律无能的绝好讽刺?他用水冲了头以让自己从这个惊人消息中回过神来。
曾经的自大,傲慢,以及对抓获凶手的绝对把握,这是警察为代表的法律的生动写照,那时,卡尔曼督察坐在办公室里,吸着烟,打着电话汇报搜捕进程,那是一个讽刺的仰拍镜头,和开始时小孩子的玩游戏时的俯拍形成强烈对比,一个是恐惧的现实,一个是法律制度下的理想,“以法律之名”和“以人民之名”的强烈对比。更强烈对比的还有最后的审判。凶手被黑道带到了老肯兹和立维酒厂,来自社会底层的人们齐聚一堂,实行了他们对凶手的审判。这是一个讽喻,那些人或者身上都带着对现实的不满,或者都有犯罪的前科,都有过被法律制裁的经历,但是现在他们站在了法律的另一面,他们高高在上面对一个杀人凶手,他们是审判者,他们在自己的法庭上掌握着对另一个个体的生杀大权,他们甚至为凶手叫来了辩护律师。他们叫着“杀了他!”当凶手的辩护律师说要交给警察,通过法院判决的时候,他们都笑了。
凶手声嘶力竭,他说自己一直有着恐惧,在街上被跟踪,随时可能被杀害,这种无尽的痛苦面前,他不能阻止自己,“除了我做那事”,他才能平息心中的恐惧,没有人知道他内心的哭泣,杀人才能消除这种痛苦。凶手是个疯子,是个病人,在大街上精神萎靡,瞌睡连连,只要他看到小孩出现就会重振精神,眼睛里发出兴奋的光芒,伴随而来的便是那欢快的口哨声。凶手并不是忏悔,而是说出了自己内心的恐惧。那些审判者说,他犯了谋杀罪,连自己都判决了自己的死刑,那结局就只有一条:杀了他。而辩护人发言了,他说,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”而对于凶手,应该把他送进医院,而不是监狱或者绞刑架。
凶手变成了病人,惩罚变成了医治,这是不是代表着法律?而在这个私设的法庭上,审判者都曾经是法律的受害者,而当面对同为杀人罪犯的时候,他们却代表了另一种正义,黑帮老大说,如果当成病人被医治,然后又被释放,然后又去杀小孩,然后又被抓,如此循环,没完没了,那么凶手就永远不会受到制裁和惩罚。而不管是黑帮的审判,还是所谓的辩护人,他们不休止的争论中,没有警察,就像搜捕凶手的那个过程一样,警察所代表的法律是缺失的,甚至是走向另一条路,而当最后警察赶到老肯兹和立维酒厂里的审判现场时,那些站在法律对面,声称警察是笨蛋的审判者举起了手,“以法律之名”,一双手伸向了那个颤抖着的凶手,法律回归,而凶手似乎也找到了自己的庇护。
谁是凶手,似乎并没有悬念,而悬念似乎只在警察那边,在没完没了的搜查取证中,那些无辜的人倒成了嫌犯,警察让社会陷入了新的恐惧,这种恐惧和凶手并没有直接关系,而对于凶手来说,是完全充满了游戏意义,他是个精神病患者,他是个疯子,他消除自我恐惧的唯一办法便是口哨,以及与欢快的口哨声一起的孩子、糖果、气球,这是他消除自我痛苦的唯一办法。这是对法律的挑衅,还是对自我的拯救?而警察为代表的法律却永远在现场之外,在凶手之外,甚至在恐惧之外,具有讽刺意味的是,发现真正的凶手是一个看不见的盲老人,在凶手肩上印上大写M的是一个小贩,他们和警察无关,和法律无关。而那些黑道里的人,更在法律之外,或者说,他们对凶手的审判完全是抛弃所谓的法律,在自足的老肯兹和立维酒厂里完成了审判。
但是法律还在那里,警察还在那里,面对警察他们还是举起了投降的手,“以法律的名义”又将凶手带向一个未知的世界。而最后真正法庭的审判只有短短40秒,三个哭泣的母亲坐着,她们说:“以人民之名,这不会把受害者带回来,我们要多点关心自己的小孩,你也要。”以人民之名去关心孩子,这是不是对于“以法律之名”的又一次解构?电影结束,她们的声音留在那里,从此人人自危,还是对司法无力的谴责?
大写的M并没有从凶手的衣服上擦去,这是一个符号,从小贩的手掌上印上去,像一面镜子刻在那个时时露出惊恐表情的凶手身上,街上所有人都处在对凶手杀人的恐惧中,那么凶手的恐惧又在哪里?“以法律之名”和“以人民之名”是两种恐惧,似乎每个人的内心都有摆脱不了的痛苦,杀人只不过是他消除社会恐惧的一种手段,但是这种手段的悖论在于,他将制造更多的恐惧。口哨声本来是欢快的,但是那是格里格的《皮尔金特》,《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。
大写的M刻在每一个人的心灵深处。
2 ) 第一部成功用声音叙事的电影
虽然第一部有声长片是1927年的《爵士乐歌星》,但电影人对当时才刚出现的声音该怎么运用并没有头绪;他们要么将其用作辅助画面叙事/视觉叙事的从属品,要么将其用作title card的替代品——直到1931年《M就是凶手》的出现。这部电影对于声音的运用毫无疑问是开创性的、革命性的,它第一次教会了人们声音如何在电影里独立的叙事,比如:
——用作sound bridge。开头小孩玩游戏画面未出我们就已经听到声音、后面Elsie在路上行走汽车未入画我们就听到了鸣笛声、后来M从小女孩花店走出来时也是人还没入画先听到店的门铃声、最后抓M进人民公审时那个楼梯那里也是声音先到然后看到M被抓的画面。
——用作人物的letimotif。《在山魔王的宫殿里》是M常哼起的歌曲,当这个声音响起时我们就知道是他来了。影片里有一幕,镜头跟拍小女孩(不是Elsie,是她之后第二个出现的女孩)在一个商店看东西时,我们听到了那个标志性的歌曲,再加上镜头逐渐靠近小女孩,这些加起来让我们知道了M在接近小女孩,制造了一种悬疑感。在这种悬疑感的制造上声音起了不可或缺的作用。
——用作描述情绪(这个作用其实不那么创新,但《M》的具体用法还是挺新颖的)。影片中有这么一个scene:M在商店的玻璃前盯着里面的东西。一开始背景音是汽笛声的嘈杂,但当M开始从玻璃上找猎物时(后面通过玻璃反光找到了一个小女孩),背景音就安静了。当他转身准备行动时,背景嘈杂的声音又出现了。这里静音时是代表他已经进入了内心世界,开始专注于找“猎物”;杂音和静音的切换则是他内心在犹豫要不要去杀人。包括M后面到咖啡厅时哼着《在山魔王的宫殿里》,其实也是他内心的挣扎的具象化。(这首歌很欢快,所以本身应该就是M用来逃避杀人的想法用的。)
——用作画外空间(而且画外并非配乐)。人民审判戏那里有很多镜头对准M时的画外声音产生的画外空间,我们听到的人民的各种笑声、嘈杂声、咒骂声等都是。
除了这个最大的亮点之外,影片在打光、阴影和布景等等方面都水平极高。
——打光上沿用德国表现主义电影的low-key lighting,背景很暗人物光影对比度高,营造一种uncanny的气氛
——阴影上比如开头Elsie看通缉令时通缉令上出现的黑影(也是M第一次现身)
——布景则与打光都沿袭德国表现主义,充满了主观情绪。例子比如:开头Elsie的妈妈等她女儿回来时不停大喊女儿名字那个让人不安的空镜头sequence(包括复杂迷离的楼梯、空荡的晾衣屋、皮球、气球等等);结尾的那个M藏身的废弃酿酒厂也是破旧而诡异,呼应了M给人的感觉。
——其他还有很多,比如M刚进人民法庭,狡辩时从屏幕的另一边伸出一只手,有点诡异吓人。
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 ) 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.
5 ) 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。
6 ) 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。
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。
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。
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
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。
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!!!!!
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。
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。
【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。
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!
群众大会真牛啊
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。
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
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。
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。
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
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
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。
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。
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?)