Normally when you hear the phrase that something was “ahead of its time,” it’s meant in a positive way, but with Fritz Lang’s 1931 classic M it’s actually an unfortunate downside. M was a very ambitious film, and so while I found a lot to admire in it, I couldn’t help but think about all of the ways in which it could be better. It’s a film that I feel was limited by its technology of the time, and so it’s the kind of movie that I think would land really well with audiences if it was released today.

The best thing about M by far is its story. The movie is about a serial killer who is going around killing children. The cops work tirelessly to try and catch the killer, but there are no real clues, and so they find themselves getting nowhere. The townspeople start to get really worried, and so it seems like the serial killer will never be caught. Realizing the failings of the police, the criminal underworld decide to take matters in their own hands, and begin a manhunt of their own for the killer. It’s a very interesting story, and one of the first of its kind to delve into such a concept.

I don’t want it to be understated that I absolutely loved the story and script. It’s really well thought out, and the movie actually takes a really interesting turn at the end when it raises plenty of questions on morality. I don’t want to spoil this section of the movie, but it gets really thought-provoking at the end. It’s such an interesting take, and so the movie offers a lot of social commentary that’s still relevant today. Apparently Lang also spent a week in a mental institution talking to child murderers in preparation for the film, and so he winds up really getting into the mind of the killer.

All the pieces for a masterpiece are there, and so it’s unfortunate that I have to admit that I didn’t love M as much as I wanted to. While the story is definitely there, I don’t feel like the execution is. I think that the biggest problem that a lot of people will have with M is that it’s just so slow. There are certain scenes that go on extremely long, and so I just felt like the movie could have benefited so much from being cut down to a shorter length. This is the kind of movie that I feel demands the audience to be gripped in excitement, and that just doesn’t happen when some of these slow scenes drag on.

The other big problem I had is just an unfortunate product of the times. When I watch older movies, I try to do so with the lens of recognizing that there were a lot more limitations, and so to try not to hold them to the same standard that I would a modern movie. Sometimes it’s just hard to do this though, and I struggled with it while watching M. You see so many crime thrillers nowadays that it’s hard not to think how much better M could have been if it had been able to implement some of these newer techniques. There were so many times where I was watching it and thinking “man, this scene could have really benefited from some intense music,” or “wow, this scene could have been so much more effective using different camera angles.” I don’t want to hold this against M too much, and it’s why I mentioned in my introduction that I feel like the movie was ahead of its time, but if I’m being honest I just didn’t feel like the movie’s execution was all there. I feel like modern filmmakers could do a much better job presenting M in a more interesting way, and so this made it harder to watch.

In the end, I did still like M. While I feel like the movie definitely has room for improvement, its smart and engaging story definitely saves it from being a bad movie. If you can get past the slow scenes and outdated film techniques, there’s a really interesting plot to be found here. This is one of those movies I’m only harsh on because I want to love it, but in the end I only like it. Give it a shot if you want to see an early take on the crime thriller genre, but otherwise I understand wanting to watch something more modern.

3.5/5