Walk Out

I wanted to admit something that most people cannot, I have never walked out of a movie that I paid for. Sure I have done some theater hopping in my life and walked out of a movie because I had to make it time for another one. Or there has been a time when I was wasting time between movies and would just randomly sneak into a movie to pass the time. But never have I paid for a movie, sat down, decided it was unwatchable and left. I give credit to my dad who took us to many bad movies throughout the years, and he never walked out. He had a different way to deal with movies that had no interest to him, he would start to sleep. I will admit that this has happened to me, in fact the #1 movie I would have walked out I feel asleep during. Here are some movies that looking back on, I might have walked out on.




1) Battlefield Earth (2000) -- This is by far one of the most unwatchable movie I felt I have seen, and I would have walked out if it was not for me falling asleep. As far as I can remember this is the first movie I feel asleep during and felt like it was okay. I would have most likely walked out of the movie even though I was seeing it my dad. I do not recall talking much about the movie afterwords, we probably switched to another movie after to make for this piece of shit.



2) Bewitched (2005) -- This was more on the audience then the movie, but the movie was pretty terrible as well. I believe I took a date (an ex girlfriend of mine). The movie had promise, Will Ferrell and Nicole Kidman seemed like a good comedy duo. The reason I wanted to walk out was because a member of the audience fell asleep and started to snore so loud that people started to laugh at him, including his family that was with him. Yes the logical response would have been to nudge and wake him up but they did no such thing. To add to all of this the theater was quite small and I could not hear the dialogue when this moron would snore. I was restored to actually yelling at the family, probably something mean. It was the first and only time I have done that. Eventually the guy woke up but by then I was pretty pissed off and unable to enjoy the movie anymore. From what I can recall the movie was pretty bad so it just lead to an overall terrible movie experience.


3) Spy Kids 3-D (2003) -- I went to see this with one of my best friends and his girlfriend at the time. On the way there they started to bicker a little and I could tell I was in for a long night. When we sat down I do not think anyone talked at all, ah a lover quarrel! Between that the movie I felt I would have walked out, but I usually will not walk out on a movie if others are around. I think I spent most of the movie making jokes in my head about it. To give the movie some credit I had never seen the first two Spy Kids but I still think that would not help out much.


4) Wing Commander (1999) -- A movie based off a hit video game, who would have thought this Matthew Lillard and Freddie Prize Jr. movie would be bad? I mean the director actually directed the video games, isn't a movie just the same thing? Um No! I can tell you why I went to see this movie and it was really for one reason, it was the only way (pre-internet) you could get a glimpse at the Star Wars Episode I trailer. "Sad to say, the only thing good about "Wing Commander", the latest 'movie based on a video game', is the impressive trailer for the upcoming "Star Wars" prequel, "The Phantom Menace". After that, you might as well leave, because it all goes downhill from that point on." -- Fronter.online. The movie was garbage, I should have walked out right after the trailer or snuck into another movie right after. But Episode I would be better, right?


5) Aeon Flux (2005) -- I was looking forward to this movie based off the kick ass MTV 5 minute segments. If SNL showed us anything with their movies base of skits anyone can go from a 3-5 minute segment and make it into a successful 90 minute movie...right? Exactly, this is no Pat The Movie but it ranks up close. I just hated this movie for some reason. I am sure it is not the worst movie I have seen but I guess I was just in a mood to see something better that day but I can still recall how bad I thought this movie was. I was bored to death during the movie. I am sure the only reason I didn't walk out was because I was with my dad, who probably was smart and feel asleep. Maybe one day I will give this movie another try.

They've released THE SATAN BUG (1965) in the US!

THE SATAN BUG
(1965, USA)

A different kind of bug hunt...

(An update of my review from 2007)

Before Michael Crichton’s The Andromeda Strain, before Outbreak, The Satan Bug was a gripping 'viral' thriller, based on Alistair Maclean’s best-selling novel. Through the 1960s and 70s, Maclean's books inspired a string of hit movies. The author's name on a poster promised adventure and man-centric thrills.

A list of his novels (with their original publishing dates) which were all turned into movies:

1957 The Guns of Navarone
1961 Fear is the Key
1962 The Golden Rendezvous
1962 The Satan Bug
1963 Ice Station Zebra
1966 When Eight Bells Toll
1967 Where Eagles Dare
1968 Force 10 From Navarone
1969 Puppet on a Chain
1970 Caravan to Vaccarès
1971 Bear Island
1974 Breakheart Pass

As you can see, his stories ranged from World War II heroics, through cold war thrillers, to high-tech terrorism. Which brings us back to The Satan Bug, which Maclean wrote under a pen-name and isn’t actually credited in the film.


This is a well-made, tight detective thriller with a slight sci-fi edge (that is if the science of such a bio-weapon is still fictional). The 'Satan Bug' is a virus engineered by the government to kill all living things, a sword of Damacles in a top secret lab in the Nevada desert. Then the bug goes missing, along with another less deadly virus.

So the story starts with a typical ‘locked room’ murder mystery – a well-guarded bunker with a huge combination locked laboratory. How did the thieves get in, let alone escape?

Top security agent, played by George Maharis (Route 66, The Sword and the Sorcerer) is brought in to find out how the virus was stolen, and where it is now. Then an incident in Miami, hundreds of people die mysteriously and suddenly…

The story depends on the audience paying attention, keeping track of a dozen different suspects, all men in suits. Dialogue drives much of the complex plot with many crucial events, even the opening murders, all happening off-screen. The early detective work has the benefit of the spectacular scenery of the desert mountains, and the action eventually takes off. But with a premise like this, it's suspenseful throughout.

The film is helped enormously by an outstanding early score from Jerry Goldsmith, his first sci-fi soundtrack, using unusual percussion and electronic sounds. The opening title theme is very striking and suitably downbeat.

The director, John Sturges, was the man behind Christmas TV hardy perennials The Magnificent Seven and The Great Escape, as well as many other well-known thrillers. He does well to keep the tension persistent and the settings familiar.

The cast also make this a pleasurable watch, with the late Anne Francis as intelligent eye candy – good to see her in something besides Forbidden Planet. An elderly Dana Andrews (Night of the Demon, Zero Hour, Crack In The World) coordinates the search for the virus, and Richard Basehart (Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea) plays the head of the scientific team (below).

Notable bit parts include a young Ed Asner (Lou Grant), with hair, and James ‘Scotty’ Doohan without any dialogue, but stealing one great scene, worthy of his red shirt…

There are also a couple of great-looking helicopters in the film, a regular feature in Alistair Maclean films, just because they were standard issue in thrillers at the time - visual shorthand for ‘high-tech’ and ‘big budget’.

The US VHS release was severely ‘panned & scanned’ down to a tight 1.33 full frame. The first widescreen release was the Fox Laserdisc.

In 2007, I was pleased to find the film on DVD in Denmark and Norway, in 2.35 anamorphic widescreen. However, the picture didn't look much better than an (analogue) laserdisc.

There was visible patterning, with hard diagonals turned into a series of steps (see the edge of the desk, above). It’s only distracting on certain scenes, but there’s also slightly muffled audio - not something I'd expect on a digital release.

So I was looking forward to this new MGM Limited Edition Collection version, even though it was an official DVD-R. I foolishly assumed that MGM (like many of the recent Warner Bros Archive releases) was going to remaster the film, curing the visual and audio faults of the Scandinavian DVD. Many websites selling this new version (it's only available online) failed to warn that this has been 'made from the best source available' - a caption which greets you only once you play the disc. A pre-emptive apology that means it doesn't look as good as it should. The exception is Amazon.com which outlines the problems prominently on the product page. I wish I'd visited them before double-dipping for the same sub-standard transfer. '...best source available'? Please don't tell me that MGM have lost the negative...

My mistake, perhaps, and at least this is a chance for the US to see a great sixties thriller in widescreen, on DVD for the first time.

Jerry Goldsmith’s scary paranoid soundtrack debuted on CD a few years ago, one of my favourite of his works. Several cues only exist today mixed in with sound effects from the film, but there’s also half an hour of just the music. Seems that I'll never get to hear the creepy synthesizers of the robbery sequence without those pneumatic sliding doors...

Lastly, there's an original trailer on YouTube.

ASTRO BOY (2009) - looking good, but...

ASTRO BOY
(2009, Hong Kong/USA/Japan co-production)

If only the script had been as good as the animation...

This beloved Japanese manga character became popular in the US when it was one of the first anime series shown on TV, back in the 1960s. Two further series were made in 1980 and 2003 and released in English language versions, but this high-budget feature film attempted to push the character as franchise material, though no sequel is happening. While it was a hit in China, it wasn't in the US... or even Japan.

The origin story of Astro hasn't been changed too drastically, retaining the tragic death of Professor Tenma's son, and the scientist's attempt to create a robot to replace him. But not just any robot. Tenma packs the it with enough 'defence systems' to remain safe from any foreseeable harm. But when Astro is activated and begins to realise his potential, the government want to use him as a weapon, or destroy him for being a potential threat.

During the power struggle over Astro's future, he escapes and runs away to live down below on the Earth's surface. Not in the beautiful floating city where robots do all the dirty work, but the trash-covered remnants of the Earth's surface...

This is a familiar premise, but clumsily outlined with a wordy, patronising prologue, rather than the elegant introduction of Pixar's recent Wall-E.


The futuristic city where Astro Boy lives was always re-imagined for each new anime series. Here the intricate pastel architecture, the designs of the giant robots and police pursuit vehicles are startling at times. The character animation and motion is dynamic and very high quality, as are the blistering action scenes.

The emotional dilemmas that Astro has to face as he finds a new place in the world are also quite tough for a children's film. The relationship with his father is far from the usual depiction of a single parent, and realistically, touchingly performed by Nicolas Cage. Cora (Kristen Bell), the tough girl he befriends, is rather a stock character, reminding me of Penny Robinson from the Lost In Space remake of 1998, though she's likeable enough.

Bill Nighy doesn't cope with voiceover acting at all well, but thankfully his character isn't in there for long. Donald Sutherland is also put in the shade by Nicolas Cage's vocal performance, as a one-note villain who tells us what he wants near the start and keeps on repeating his dastardly schemes if we'd forgotten.

The main drawback with the film were the secondary 'good' mechanical characters. The robot society in Astro Boy are the crux of the manga - future humanity's relationship with sentient robots. Many of Tezuma's original stories dealt with stories of an integrated automated workforce seriously enough to rival and predate subplots in Spielberg's A.I. (2004). This new Astro Boy includes an arena where robots fight each other to destruction, taken from the stories, echoed in A.I..

Apart from the snazzy-looking 'evil' ones, the robots aren't dealt with seriously at all, but as comedy relief. One dimensional characters with poorly underwritten gags that reduce many scenes to the level of tiny tot TV. Bizarrely, these comedy reliefs are part of a robot liberation front, a non-important subplot trading on jokes about powerless grass roots political groups. It's the wrong era for satire like this and feeble humour. Without them, this would be a much stronger film for all ages.

This new Astro Boy movie is available in the UK and US on DVD and blu-ray.

My New Favorite

I recently decided to change my favorite super-hero from Spider-Man to Batman. I felt that it was time for the change because Batman is more dark and adult. I think Spider-Man is geared towards more of the teen to twenties crowd (so two years ago for me). Here are some things that weighed on my mind while making the change (and some that didn't).

Villains:

Spider-Man has some great villains, including his biggest rival the Green Goblin. You also have Lizard, Electro, Kraven the Hunter, Doctor Octopus, Mysterio, Sandman, Rhino, Venom, and the Vulture. In my mind he has some of the best villains in the entire Marvel universe. But a lot of the bad guys seem to have been easily defeated. Electro does not strike fear into me and to be honest the Green Goblin just threw pumpkin bombs.


Batman of course has one of the best villains ever made in Joker. A personal favorite because he never took what he did too serious even if it was paralyzing Commissioner Gordon's daughter. Batman and most of his villains also have a deep rooted past. He has a long love interest in Catwoman and he was was friends with Harvey Dent before he turned into Two Face. You also have Doctor Freeze, Poison Ivy, The Riddler, The Penguin, Ra's Al Ghul, The Scarecrow, Killer Croc, and Clayface.

Edge: Batman


Costume:

Spidey has the classic red and blue costume, with those two big white eyes. You know for sure it is Spider-Man when you see the costume. It is one of the best superhero costumes of all time. He also has those cool webs always around him, which look badass.


Batman is equally as classic and well known. You have the darker colors (best in sneaking around Gotham) but the classic bat emblem with the yellow back, to let the bad guys know that yep, this is batman and you are screwed. The cape and cowl are just as iconic.

Edge: Spider-Man (very very close)

Supporting Characters:


Batman has his loyal butler Alfred to help him get through the day. He has had three Robin's assist him over the years. One is now Nightwing, one was killed by the Joker but has recently been resurrected as a villain, and the latest has sort of gone off on his own. Batman also have Commissioner Gordon and his daughter (and former Batgirl now turned helper Oracle) Barbra Gordon.



Spidey has his wife and love Mary Jane, who is hot! He also has (or until recently) had Aunt May as his rock. He has had his own tragedy in the loss of Gwen Stacy. His best friend Harry Osborne's dad Norman was also the Green Goblin.

Edge: Push


Movies:

The Spiderman movies were lead by director Sam Raimi, who made the movies fun and did not forget the roots of the comics. Tobey Mcguire was an excellent choice to play Peter Parker. The first movie sort of paved the way this comic book movie film revival. The first Spiderman movie does not hold up as well as, repeat viewings I have had made me ponder why I thought it so good in the first place. The second and far superior movie Spiderman 2, was much better. Spiderman gets a great villain in Doctor Octopus played by Alfred Molina (who gives the villain heart). They have some very memorable sequences and the action is stepped up over the first film, it is often on top lists of comic book movies and deserves to be. Spiderman 3 was problematic from the start. It seemed that Raimi was forced to use the Venom character without wanting too. Venom and Sandman were both villains and they also decided to give Harry Osborne his own costume and also Peter would have a new love interest. If it seems like a lot for one movie, it was. The movie was a commerical success but most fanboys have not forgotten the bitter taste from Spiderman 3, it could have been something special if they just used one villain instead of 3! They are currently filming a Spiderman reebot movie.


Batman has also had his share of movies. Batman and Batman Returns were both directed by Tim Burton and show the darker side of Batman. The Joker is played by Jack Nicholson and Batman was played by Michael Keaton of all people. The Burton films strayed towards the darker edgier side of Batman and both worked very well. I felt Batman Returns was underrated, and they handled having two villains very well (Catwoman and The Penguin). The third film Batman Forever showcased a new director (Joel Schumacher) and a new Batman (Val Kilmer). They sort of threw a lot at the audience, besides having two villains in The Riddler and Two Face they threw in Robin and giving Bruce Wayned a love interest (Nicole Kidman). The movie was pretty fun and enertaining at the time. It does not hold up as well and you can see how it would all go bad in the follow up film Batman and Robin. This time the movie went for all camp and not substance, what resulted was the worst Batman ever imagined. Doctor Freeze was played as a huge joke with one liner for everything by Arnold Schwarzenegger and Uma Thurman phoned her performance as Poison Ivy (although she did have some good sex appeal. George Clooney took of the role of Batman but with little dialogue to work with could do nothing. We are also introduced to Batgirl played by Alicia Silverstone, I think it would be one of the last big roles in her career and with good reason. Batman and Robin became the joke of what a comic book should never be.


With no where left to go the Batman movie was also rebooted. In 2005 Christopher Nolan was up the task and released Batman Begins, starting over with a real world take on Batman (Christian Bale). The film was a huge critical and commercial success. I thought the movie was very well done and I enjoy it but it also does not hold up as well as I was hoping, but still a quality piece of film making. Three years later Nolan thrilled audiences and this blogger with what I consider my favorite comic book movie of all time, The Dark Knight. Once again the Joker is the main villain, played by Heath Ledger (who we all know passed away before the movie was finished) who gives a masterful performance, in fact he would win an Oscar for it. It is hard to explain why I love this movie but I just do, its such a fresh take on characters that have been around for so long. I just love the Joker vs. Batman, Bale stepped it up on this one. You can really feel the tension and the movie is just draw droopingly beautiful and tragic.

Edge: Batman


Powers:

Spiderman was bitten by a radioactive spider that granted him all the powers of a spider, he can stick to walls and is agile and has double the strength of a normal human. He also posses a spider sense of when trouble is going to happen that warns him (by far the coolest and most useful power). In the movies he has the ability to spin webs from his wrists but in the comics he created his own web shooters. Peter Parker is also a brilliant scientist although they rarely use this aspect of him anymore.


Batman is a genius and a masterful detective and in the top physical shape of a human. He is also handsome, but that is hard to tell with the mask on.

Edge: Spider-Man


Gadgets:

Spiderman created his own web shooters, which is pretty cool and shows off his nerdy scientific side. The webs are a pretty remarkable seeings as they can take Peter Parkers weight and let him swing around on them. They have also been used to lift very heavy objects as well as a useful tool for tying up bad guys.

Batman unlike Spiderman has a ton of money so he can afford to have the best gadgets. He has the Batmobile which is iconic and always badass. He also has the bat-plane and the utility belt which always has some useful tools to take down bad guys or be used for detective work. Since he has no actual powers, Batman must rely more on his gadgets to get by.


Edge: Batman


The list could go on and on but both heroes are great in their own ways, I am still giving the edge to my new hero Batman who holds a slight 3-2 advantage over Spidey.

AFTERSHOCK (2010) - heart-rending disaster movie from China

AFTERSHOCK
(2010, China, Tangshan dadizhen)

The psychological debris from a natural disaster

The city of Tangshan in China suffered a devastating earthquake in 1976 that left 240,000 dead. But Aftershock doesn't exploit the extent of the devastation, but homes in on the lasting effects of the disaster on one family.

Early in the story, the quake is shown from the perspective of a few people in one neighbourhood (rather than an overview of the city), as a mother and father race to protect their children. The amazing scene is a seamless mix of CGI and large-scale sets. But unlike the disaster movies that I'm used to, the accent wasn't on spectacular destruction. The deaths had more emotional impact, helped by the random victims being played by actors rather than 'digital stuntmen'.


The story really begins when the dust settles and it emerges who survived. As rescuers dig through the rubble, the mother is forced to decide between the lives of her son and her daughter. A natural disaster has forced her to make the most difficult decision of her life, and could ruin the rest of it. She reluctantly chooses to save her son. Without her knowing, her daughter has miraculously survived, but heard her mother decide against saving her. Also completely traumatised, she walks away from the city to a new life.


The story then repeatedly leaps forward to see how these survivors lead their lives, still haunted by the day of the quake, right up to the present day, 32 years later. Some of these 'fast-forward' fades-to-black avoid many events that are ripe for melodrama. The director avoids many of the cliches, often leaving the viewer to deduce some of the major changes in the characters' lives.


In the background, there's a summary of the last thirty years of life in China. It's interesting to see the similarities and differences between western life and communist society. I've read that this film didn't get an Oscar nomination because it didn't appeal enough to an international audience, but it's far from inaccessible. There are very few important references to historic events or unfamiliar places.


There also seemed to be a conscious decision to appeal internationally. An orphan being fostered by both parents in Red Army uniform looked like it was aimed at non-Chinese viewers, trying to counter decades of negative depiction of communism.

The opening shot had me a little worried, a swooping helicopter shot of Tangshan, filled with unconvincing CGI dragonflies, (an illustration of the kinds of natural warnings China had before the quake). Understandably, there were also CGI establishing shots of Tangshan as it was before the quake. But soon the film settled down as a very high-quality production, with the exception of one non-Chinese actor who spoiled a later scene.

Xiaogang Feng, director of Assembly (2007) and The Banquet (2006) assembled a fantastic cast who convey some truly heart-rending scenes. Though apart from the quake itself, the many intimate dramatic scenes were hardly an obvious choice for an IMAX presentation, as it was in China.


With so many regular natural disasters around the world, and so many people affected, it's hard to let yourself be affected by each new catastrophe. Hollywood disaster movies also maintain this distance, rarely depicting death tolls, permanent injuries and lasting emotional effects.

For a disaster movie, this unleashed a huge emotional impact on me, emphasising the personal tragedies that last for decades after the funerals are over.


I watched a DVD from Hong Kong, released by Media Star, with good subtitles and widescreen anamorphic aspect. The extras were deleted scenes, cast interviews and a trailer, but these had no English subtitles. The USA has yet to release this, but there was a limited run in the UK and there's now a DVD, with cover art misleadingly showing skyscrapers in the background (above) - compare it to the Chinese DVD art (at top).

An extensive, spoilery review on Asia Pacific Arts.

An original trailer on YouTube...

Spring Training Power Poll

I said I would try to keep this up so here it goes. Since catchers and pitchers are reporting February 14th (Valentine's Day...bummer) I wanted to update the power poll. Lots of this has to do with big free agent signings and team improving in areas on concern. I will most likely do another poll right before the season starts as well. But here is something to wet you appetite until baseball season begins.

2011 Spring Training Power Poll:

1. Philadelphia Phillies
2. Boston Red Sox
3. San Francisco Giants
4. New York Yankees
5. Atlanta Braves
6. Texas Rangers
7. Minnesota Twins
8. Cincinnati Reds
9. Chicago White Sox
10. St. Louis Cardinals
11. Detroit Tigers
12. Colorado Rockies
13. Milwaukee Brewers
14. Oakland A's
15. Tampa Bay Rays
16. Baltimore Orioles
17. Los Angeles Angels
18. San Diego Padres
19. Toronto Blue Jays
20. Florida Marlins
21. Los Angeles Dodgers
22. Chicago Cubs
23. New York Mets
24. Cleveland Indians
25. Washington Nationals
26. Houston Astros
27. Arizona Diamond Backs
28. Seattle Mariners
29. Kansas City Royals
30. Pittsburgh Pirates

TENDERNESS OF THE WOLVES (1973) - still shocking?

TENDERNESS OF THE WOLVES
(1973, West Germany, Die Zärtlichkeit der Wölfe)

A recreation of the exploits of a German serial killer who attacked young men with vampirism, cannibalism and necrophilia. Watching it again, I've changed my mind about this film.

In post-war Germany (the film moves the setting from the end of the First World War, to the end of the Second), two petty crooks find a new way to find meat to sell to their bankrupt neighbours. Fritz Haarmann murders young homeless men, then sells pieces of their bodies to a local cafe. His lover helps dispose of the remains and cashes in the victims' belongings on the black market.

One of Haarmann's neighbours notices that young men go to his flat but are never seen again. But his reputation as a generous do-gooder and his job as a deputised police inspector help hide his crimes from the authorities...


I've always regarded this as a similarly taboo movie as I Spit On Your Grave, Straw Dogs and Last House On The Left. A 1970s' horror that pushed the envelope too far. An experiment in bad taste that history wouldn't repeat. Viewing it again, my knee-jerk reactions started kicking in again, critical that this was a worst-case representation of gay men. A weird-looking outcast who preys on young straight men for sex, sucks their blood, kills them and eats them... but not necessarily in that order. If that's not enough stigma-by-association for you, some of the victims were under-aged.

More objectively, I imagined the film with female victims, and it became more typical of seventies Euro-horror. The extreme elements of the murders are mostly implied and not shown. The most explicit angle of the film is the sexuality of the killer, and by explicit I mean kissing his boyfriend and the nudity of his prey. Compared to other films of the era, there's little difference in pushing the boundaries, besides gender. In Martin, the bloody victims and the nudity are female. Blood On Satan's Claw and To The Devil a Daughter both had full-frontal nudity of young women.

Admittedly many of the naked young men in Tenderness of the Wolves are gratuitous to the plot, once Haarmann's obsessions have been established. This casual and unflattering male nudity is surprising today, as it continues to be rare in horror or any other genre. I think it's this aspect that makes it relatively obscure, excluding it from it's two genres. Horror and gay-themed cinema continue to keep a mutually-exclusive distance.

I'm accepting the film now, but my paranoid defences originally made me back away, writing it off as indefensible back in the 80s when I first saw it. The theme of gay vampirism was too perfect for providing fuel for demonisation in the decade of AIDS hysteria. But Tenderness of the Wolves was made a decade before the AIDS crisis and might even have been considered relevant had it been released a few years later. It unhelpfully mixed the genre of lurid 'true crime' exploitation with the story of a gay love affair going sour. While it's a truthful and sympathetic depiction of a gay relationship, this isn't a great genre for making positive political statements. But what should you expect from director Ulli Lommel, collaborating with producer Rainer Werner Fassbinder (who also appears in the film as a sleazy pimp)?

Anyone frightened off by the recent quality of Lommel's films can be assured that this early work is well-produced and dramatically convincing. Though it's less of a narrative than a timeline of case history highlights. Even the detective work, usually the focus of true crime dramas, is sidelined as music replaces their dialogue. The corruption angle is hardly exploited, despite Haarmann working for the police while they're also hunting for him.

There are homages to Fritz Lang's M in quoted imagery and Haarmann being as completely bald as Peter Lorre's character, even though the real Haarmann had hair. M was also based on a different serial killer - Peter Kürten, the 'Vampire of Düsseldorf', whose most horrific crimes involved very young girls. The two films and their subjects are often confused, the original cases both being from Germany in the 1920s. Fritz Haarmann was known as the 'Butcher of Hanover', and his victims were young men between 13 and 20.

The shaven-headed Kurt Raab gives a relatively restrained performance as the killer (imagine Klaus Kinski in the same role), charming his neighbours and evoking sympathy when his boyfriend leaves him. Raab only lived to be three years older than Haarmann, ironically dying of AIDS-related illnesses. He'd had a full career as a screenwriter and actor, one of his last appearances was in Escape from Sobibor with Rutger Hauer.

I watched the Connoisseur Video VHS release from the UK (with a slight variation of the English title), which has good subtitles and a 1.66 widescreen aspect. The Anchor Bay release DVD is still available in the US.