In my opinion this is just an OK film. Except for some little stylistic tricks there is nothing special. The story is OK, how it is told is rather weak, in some parts it's even ridiculous, the acting is mostly very weak except for Lorre who you don't see much of anyway, and the sound quality is horrible (something you can't blame it for, but I had to use HEADPHONES on full volume to even understand the words!) but switching from sound to silent all the time is very distracting and has no dramatic effect at all (even if some say so) - the opposite is the case, it seems very amateurish. The slow pacing is typical for it's time. And suspense? I don't think so.
In my opinion the main reasons why this film is so critically acclaimed are:
A) Lorre's overacting. Whenever overacting has a purpose it's critically acclaimed. And his acting as a madman is very effective.
B) I'd call it "heavy look". The topic seems "heavy" and the plot and style seem all too heavy and important. You almost want the film to be successful so you search for it in Lorre's acting. As a justification so to say.
I'm sure you like the film for many other reasons too. Some more important reasons maybe. But that doesn't mean I'm wrong. It's a film we want to like and where you don't want to look for the flaws. Well, long story short, I don't think the final result is a success. There is too much Average in it and the Great isn't all that great.
Metropolis, Nosferatu, Caligari, Sunrise, I think, have all a more stunning look. All silent and all made before "M". Don't get me wrong, the cinematography is good and also inventive in little parts, but not THAT revolutionary that it deserves the reputation it has.
Probably the flaws are too big for me to fully appreciate the rest. Like every time one said: "He doesn't leave any marks...blah, blah" I had to laugh. He talks with the kids in the middle of the day in the middle of the street, he walks along the streets with them, he goes into shops, buys stuff for them, he makes mad gestures in public. And then he also whistles this damn song all the time so loud you hear it from three streets away while everyone in the audience knows from beginning on that this will be his doom.
6/10
In my opinion the main reasons why this film is so critically acclaimed are:
A) Lorre's overacting. Whenever overacting has a purpose it's critically acclaimed. And his acting as a madman is very effective.
B) I'd call it "heavy look". The topic seems "heavy" and the plot and style seem all too heavy and important. You almost want the film to be successful so you search for it in Lorre's acting. As a justification so to say.
I'm sure you like the film for many other reasons too. Some more important reasons maybe. But that doesn't mean I'm wrong. It's a film we want to like and where you don't want to look for the flaws. Well, long story short, I don't think the final result is a success. There is too much Average in it and the Great isn't all that great.
Metropolis, Nosferatu, Caligari, Sunrise, I think, have all a more stunning look. All silent and all made before "M". Don't get me wrong, the cinematography is good and also inventive in little parts, but not THAT revolutionary that it deserves the reputation it has.
Probably the flaws are too big for me to fully appreciate the rest. Like every time one said: "He doesn't leave any marks...blah, blah" I had to laugh. He talks with the kids in the middle of the day in the middle of the street, he walks along the streets with them, he goes into shops, buys stuff for them, he makes mad gestures in public. And then he also whistles this damn song all the time so loud you hear it from three streets away while everyone in the audience knows from beginning on that this will be his doom.
6/10