62 reviews
1922 Germany was in political turmoil and spiralling into a hyperinflation crisis. Meanwhile in cinema the German Expressionist movement was coming of age with the release of FW Murnau's Nosferatu and this, the first in Fritz Lang's series of epics Dr Mabuse, der Spieler. While perhaps not as classically expressionist as Murnau or Robert Wiene, Fritz Lang arguably put his finger on the mood of times better than any other. With Mabuse, his unique style develops to convey a picture of the chaos of the era.
The opening sequences of Dr Mabuse are evidence of screenwriter Thea von Harbou's growing strength as a storyteller and Lang's economy of expression. The first shot a close-up of Mabuse's hand, holding cards showing his various disguises presents and defines the title character. A frantic, rapidly cut action scene then hooks the viewer, whilst introducing us to Mabuse's network of minions. After that, we see Mabuse's elaborate scam at the stock market. In one particularly striking image, the crowd of traders panic and jostle, whilst Mabuse stands calmly on a pedestal above them a perfect metaphor for his position of power amidst social chaos.
At one point in his youth Lang trained as an architect, and this fact is central to his style as a director. There are hints of this in his earliest films, but in Mabuse the architectural touch is fully matured. Throughout, the set design and décor is almost more important than the actors. Whereas other expressionists would evoke mood most frequently through use of light and shadow, Lang does it primarily through use of space. He composes shots in straight lines and geometric patterns, occasionally seeming to form eyes or faces. Often characters are dwarfed by the sheer cavernous size of the rooms they are in. Also look at how many scenes take place on a stage or lecture hall, and how Lang contrasts opposing shots of speaker (or performer) and audience a metaphor for master and masses. He even has Mabuse sitting at his desk facing the camera, as if to make the real-life viewers his audience a touch Lang used a fair bit throughout his work.
A frequent complaint about Dr Mabuse is its gargantuan length and I have to admit it does drag in places. Lang's following silent features, although also very long were extremely tight in structure and worked like a classical symphony in the way different parts complemented each other. Dr Mabuse is not quite up to that standard yet. While some of the individual acts are well-balanced little dramas in themselves, as a whole it is a little uneven. Mabuse also suffers from wordy title cards and a lack of convincing action sequences again, problems that Lang would have solved by the time of Metropolis. It's worth remembering though that on its original release parts one and two were shown on consecutive nights, and it's much easier to digest this way. I wouldn't recommend any first-time viewer try to tackle the whole thing in one sitting.
Holding the whole thing together is a mesmerising performance from Rudolph Klein-Rogge in the title role. While acting in Hollywood was becoming increasingly naturalistic at this time, Germany was a little way behind and performances still tended to be a bit too theatrical and exaggerated. Lang however softens the impact of melodramatic acting by never letting the characters get too realistic in the first place. Cinema was like a comic-book for Lang, in his urban thrillers as much as in his exotic adventures, and this approach saves Dr Mabuse from becoming too strained and ridiculous.
Although it's not as polished as any of his later silents, Dr Mabuse was perhaps Lang's most influential film. The idea of revealing the identity and methods of the villain to the audience was no doubt a forerunner of Hitchcock's mode of building suspense. A young Sergei Eisenstein was given the task of cutting a shortened version of Mabuse for the Russian public, and the way Lang imbues each shot with meaning may have contributed to the concept of intellectual montage. This is not to mention the impact of the Mabuse character on generations of cinematic villains to come. Dr Mabuse, der Spieler is a far from perfect film, and can be tough to watch although it's not as dull as some would claim, and it's certainly a key film in several strands of cinematic development.
The opening sequences of Dr Mabuse are evidence of screenwriter Thea von Harbou's growing strength as a storyteller and Lang's economy of expression. The first shot a close-up of Mabuse's hand, holding cards showing his various disguises presents and defines the title character. A frantic, rapidly cut action scene then hooks the viewer, whilst introducing us to Mabuse's network of minions. After that, we see Mabuse's elaborate scam at the stock market. In one particularly striking image, the crowd of traders panic and jostle, whilst Mabuse stands calmly on a pedestal above them a perfect metaphor for his position of power amidst social chaos.
At one point in his youth Lang trained as an architect, and this fact is central to his style as a director. There are hints of this in his earliest films, but in Mabuse the architectural touch is fully matured. Throughout, the set design and décor is almost more important than the actors. Whereas other expressionists would evoke mood most frequently through use of light and shadow, Lang does it primarily through use of space. He composes shots in straight lines and geometric patterns, occasionally seeming to form eyes or faces. Often characters are dwarfed by the sheer cavernous size of the rooms they are in. Also look at how many scenes take place on a stage or lecture hall, and how Lang contrasts opposing shots of speaker (or performer) and audience a metaphor for master and masses. He even has Mabuse sitting at his desk facing the camera, as if to make the real-life viewers his audience a touch Lang used a fair bit throughout his work.
A frequent complaint about Dr Mabuse is its gargantuan length and I have to admit it does drag in places. Lang's following silent features, although also very long were extremely tight in structure and worked like a classical symphony in the way different parts complemented each other. Dr Mabuse is not quite up to that standard yet. While some of the individual acts are well-balanced little dramas in themselves, as a whole it is a little uneven. Mabuse also suffers from wordy title cards and a lack of convincing action sequences again, problems that Lang would have solved by the time of Metropolis. It's worth remembering though that on its original release parts one and two were shown on consecutive nights, and it's much easier to digest this way. I wouldn't recommend any first-time viewer try to tackle the whole thing in one sitting.
Holding the whole thing together is a mesmerising performance from Rudolph Klein-Rogge in the title role. While acting in Hollywood was becoming increasingly naturalistic at this time, Germany was a little way behind and performances still tended to be a bit too theatrical and exaggerated. Lang however softens the impact of melodramatic acting by never letting the characters get too realistic in the first place. Cinema was like a comic-book for Lang, in his urban thrillers as much as in his exotic adventures, and this approach saves Dr Mabuse from becoming too strained and ridiculous.
Although it's not as polished as any of his later silents, Dr Mabuse was perhaps Lang's most influential film. The idea of revealing the identity and methods of the villain to the audience was no doubt a forerunner of Hitchcock's mode of building suspense. A young Sergei Eisenstein was given the task of cutting a shortened version of Mabuse for the Russian public, and the way Lang imbues each shot with meaning may have contributed to the concept of intellectual montage. This is not to mention the impact of the Mabuse character on generations of cinematic villains to come. Dr Mabuse, der Spieler is a far from perfect film, and can be tough to watch although it's not as dull as some would claim, and it's certainly a key film in several strands of cinematic development.
This film, like many of Fritz Lang's best efforts, mixes pulp fiction, realism, fantasy and social comment, in this case to adapt to the screen Jacques Norbert's serial novel about a diabolical mastermind (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) who can destabilize the national economy by manipulation of the stock market, operate an underground counterfeiting ring manned by blind slaves, hypnotize card players into losing all of their money to him and even engineer a mass hallucination. He changes his identity for every caper via costumes, wigs, prosthetics and fake facial hair. He has in his employ an army of henchmen from slum denizens and cutthroats to a celebrated follies dancer whom he uses as a lure for wealthy victims. And for what? His purpose in life is to "play the game" and undermine his opponent's will. At one point he states that there is no such thing as love, only lust and the will to power (or, as some interpretations go, the will to possess what one desires). When state prosecutor Von Wenk (the sturdy Bernhard Goetzke) launches an investigation into this one-man crime wave his pursuit covers the social spectrum from the dives and gutters of the underworld to the palaces of the nobility.
The film is beautifully designed and photographed and organized into scenes and acts. Each scene is a story unto itself. This structuring helps provide a centering or equilibrium for the viewer amidst the cascade of events and characters.
Among Mabuse's victims: A bored countess (Gertrud Welcker) who frequents the illegal gambling houses to observe the reactions to wins and losses on the faces of the players so that she can vicariously experience passion. She longs for an adventure the likes of which she can never experience at home with her wimpy husband who spends his time tinkering with antique art objects. Little does she know that she is about to be plunged into the adventure of her life.
Another young beauty, this one a prominent cabaret performer (Aud Egede Nissen), has fallen under the spell of Dr. Mabuse, lives in an apartment adjacent to his hotel suite and serves as bait for unsuspecting victims like the wealthy young Edgar Hull (the not-so-young Paul Richter), who is milked of his fortune by Mabuse.
No one can defy Mabuse. He seems to be everywhere and know everything, so that if you dare betray him you are as good as dead. This terror ensures his gang's devotion. The similarities to Hitler (or any totalitarian leader with secret police tentacles reaching far and wide) are obvious and this film has been cited often as a foreshadowing of the Hitler era. Part 2 is even subtitled "a story for our time." The notion of conspiratorial forces operating behind the scenes was on the German mind when this film was made.
There are many startling parallels between MABUSE and the 1920 classic THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI, an interesting fact considering the legend that Lang was involved in the conceptual stage of CALIGARI. Both stories feature a spooky doctor with hypnotic powers who spreads evil through the land. In both films the identity of the central evil character changes: Dr. Mabuse assumes many disguises; Dr. Caligari remains himself until he appears as a psychiatrist at the end. The sign on Mabuse's door reads "Psychoanalyse." Caligari's somnambulist predicts a man will die within hours; Mabuse hypnotizes a man into driving himself over the bank of a canal. The villains even visually resemble each other in both films: Mabuse often wears white fright wigs and high hats reminiscent of Werner Krauss's look in Caligari. MABUSE operates on a wider canvas than CALIGARI. Whereas Caligari's only instrument is his somnambulist slave, Mabuse operates an extensive network of henchmen. At the climax of both stories a word ("Caligari"/"Melior") is animatedly superimposed over the screen action to intensify the impact. The whole of CALIGARI is designed expressionistically; expressionistic sets are used minimally and subtly in Mabuse but the subject of expressionism is briefly discussed in one scene wherein Mabuse describes it as "another game" or words to that effect. The expressionism in CALIGARI is all-encompassing; in MABUSE it is under control, part of a larger design. In both films there are scenes in prison cells. In both films a beautiful young woman who has fainted is carried off and then liberated.
In the Kino edition of MABUSE there is one apparent technical glitch: a car chase near the end starts at night and suddenly flips to daylight with no sense of transition. If this was Lang's idea of "day for night" shooting, he overshot the mark hugely.
On display here is Lang's penchant for mixing exotic pulp, unadorned realism, and pure fantasy. In MABUSE it is the doctor's magical hypnotic powers that stretch and finally break credulity, woven as they are into an otherwise naturalistic crime melodrama. This mixture of the fantastical and the ordinary occurs in all of Lang's 1920's work, right through WOMAN IN THE MOON (1929). Only with M (1931) does he begin to abandon fantasy and concentrate on social issues, whereupon he steered clear of pulp and exotica until late in life when he returned to the genre in the late 1950s with his India trilogy. But by that time film audiences had long outgrown the conventions of the 1920's. And so ended Lang's career.
But the sheer scope and expert execution of this film under the conditions that prevailed in Germany in 1921-22, supervised by a man barely 30 years old, is quite an achievement and should be seen.
The film is beautifully designed and photographed and organized into scenes and acts. Each scene is a story unto itself. This structuring helps provide a centering or equilibrium for the viewer amidst the cascade of events and characters.
Among Mabuse's victims: A bored countess (Gertrud Welcker) who frequents the illegal gambling houses to observe the reactions to wins and losses on the faces of the players so that she can vicariously experience passion. She longs for an adventure the likes of which she can never experience at home with her wimpy husband who spends his time tinkering with antique art objects. Little does she know that she is about to be plunged into the adventure of her life.
Another young beauty, this one a prominent cabaret performer (Aud Egede Nissen), has fallen under the spell of Dr. Mabuse, lives in an apartment adjacent to his hotel suite and serves as bait for unsuspecting victims like the wealthy young Edgar Hull (the not-so-young Paul Richter), who is milked of his fortune by Mabuse.
No one can defy Mabuse. He seems to be everywhere and know everything, so that if you dare betray him you are as good as dead. This terror ensures his gang's devotion. The similarities to Hitler (or any totalitarian leader with secret police tentacles reaching far and wide) are obvious and this film has been cited often as a foreshadowing of the Hitler era. Part 2 is even subtitled "a story for our time." The notion of conspiratorial forces operating behind the scenes was on the German mind when this film was made.
There are many startling parallels between MABUSE and the 1920 classic THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI, an interesting fact considering the legend that Lang was involved in the conceptual stage of CALIGARI. Both stories feature a spooky doctor with hypnotic powers who spreads evil through the land. In both films the identity of the central evil character changes: Dr. Mabuse assumes many disguises; Dr. Caligari remains himself until he appears as a psychiatrist at the end. The sign on Mabuse's door reads "Psychoanalyse." Caligari's somnambulist predicts a man will die within hours; Mabuse hypnotizes a man into driving himself over the bank of a canal. The villains even visually resemble each other in both films: Mabuse often wears white fright wigs and high hats reminiscent of Werner Krauss's look in Caligari. MABUSE operates on a wider canvas than CALIGARI. Whereas Caligari's only instrument is his somnambulist slave, Mabuse operates an extensive network of henchmen. At the climax of both stories a word ("Caligari"/"Melior") is animatedly superimposed over the screen action to intensify the impact. The whole of CALIGARI is designed expressionistically; expressionistic sets are used minimally and subtly in Mabuse but the subject of expressionism is briefly discussed in one scene wherein Mabuse describes it as "another game" or words to that effect. The expressionism in CALIGARI is all-encompassing; in MABUSE it is under control, part of a larger design. In both films there are scenes in prison cells. In both films a beautiful young woman who has fainted is carried off and then liberated.
In the Kino edition of MABUSE there is one apparent technical glitch: a car chase near the end starts at night and suddenly flips to daylight with no sense of transition. If this was Lang's idea of "day for night" shooting, he overshot the mark hugely.
On display here is Lang's penchant for mixing exotic pulp, unadorned realism, and pure fantasy. In MABUSE it is the doctor's magical hypnotic powers that stretch and finally break credulity, woven as they are into an otherwise naturalistic crime melodrama. This mixture of the fantastical and the ordinary occurs in all of Lang's 1920's work, right through WOMAN IN THE MOON (1929). Only with M (1931) does he begin to abandon fantasy and concentrate on social issues, whereupon he steered clear of pulp and exotica until late in life when he returned to the genre in the late 1950s with his India trilogy. But by that time film audiences had long outgrown the conventions of the 1920's. And so ended Lang's career.
But the sheer scope and expert execution of this film under the conditions that prevailed in Germany in 1921-22, supervised by a man barely 30 years old, is quite an achievement and should be seen.
In this review I refer to the Transit Film DVD edition from the F W Murnau Foundation (or Stiftung, if you understand German!). This 2 DVD set is an excellent restoration of this(these?) movie(s). At three and a half hours, some may argue that it is a little daunting for the uninitiated silent film viewer, but in my humble opinion it is so well made (by Fritz Lang) that it still stands up today as a masterpiece of "gangster cinema". Shot between November 1921 and March 1922, the film was made only a couple of years after Lang's directorial debut (Halblutt - 1919), and five years before Metropolis - perhaps Lang's masterpiece. It can be argued that it represents the start of a 'series' of gangster/crime related movies by Lang, and parallels can be drawn to Spione (Spies) of 1927/28, and M (1931 - Lang's first talkie), and of course, The Testament of Dr Mabuse (1932/33). There was also a final addition from 1960, The Thousand Eyes of Dr Mabuse, but that is obviously of a different era. It is interesting to observe that Lang/von Harbou clearly were attempting to create a screen detective character something like Sherlock Holmes in the form of Commissioner Lohmann, (superbly played by Otto Wernicke) for it is he who is the detective in both M and Testament. However, I digress. Where both M and Testament concern themselves with the work of the police in an almost documentary fashion (especially M), Der Spieler is almost exclusively concerned with the working of the criminal mind. Mabuse is played by Rudolf Klein-Rogge, one of Lang's favourites - though one wonders what Klein-Rogge made of Lang - Thea von Harbou, the screen-writer, married Lang in 1921, after divorcing Klein-Rogge! He gives a masterful performance as Mabuse, and dominates the film. Even when not on the screen, his omnipotence pervades the entire proceedings. Whilst I wouldn't go so far as to describe the picture as 'gripping', it still has the power to hold the attention for most of its mighty three and a half hours. For me, at least, this is aided in no small measure by the magnificent new soundtrack by Aljocha Zimmermann, whose use of leitmotif (in true Teutonic style) adds immeasurably to the overall enjoyment of the film. I strongly recommend this picture, not only to serious students of German Silent Cinema (they'll have seen it anyway!) but to anybody who enjoys a good gangster/crime story. If you have a hang-up about silent movies, then in all honesty this isn't going to change your mind - but give it a try. I think its worth the effort in the end. Trivia: Although made in Berlin, and the numerous vehicles all drive on the right as one would expect, they are without exception, all right hand drive!
Dr. Mabuse is a name familiar to almost everyone in Germany, but most Americans would have to be told that he's a criminal mastermind, psychiatrist, gambler and hypnotist with supernatural powers. Mabuse is notable for his brilliant disguises and his gang of minions who conspire against people and institutions for the sole purpose of bringing power and wealth to himself. This evil genius is known only as The Great Unknown to those who wish to stop him. Mabuse was created by Norbert Jacques for a novel which has never been out of print in Germany. The director of this film, Fritz Lang, claimed him for his own; and now Mabuse is known not as a character in a novel but as a character in three Fritz Lang films, the first of which is this innovative and hugely influential silent movie.
Lang's storytelling techniques are especially innovative, but later spy films, including Lang's own, have greatly improved on what's here and leave modern viewers alert to the slow pace, murky details and confusing plot twists. What hasn't been improved upon is the artistry behind the photographic effects. I don't mean the effects themselves: modern special effects are infinitely more sophisticated. This film's effects have a great impact even—or especially—on today's viewer who is accustomed to a rapid-fire series of elaborate, gaudy computer-generated pictures, like those in, say, Peter Jackson's "King Kong." Nothing in that film is as memorable to me as this movie's scene where the camera closes in on Mabuse and everything around him goes dark, leaving only one glowing, malevolent head floating in the blackness.
The highly exaggerated style of acting from everyone in the cast would look idiotic if seen in isolated bits. Von Welk (Bernhard Goetzke), tilting back his head and crossing his eyes as Mabuse (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) hypnotizes him, would have been a perfect clip for Jay Ward's "Fractured Flickers." As part of this film, every melodramatic moment from the cast is effective in a way that a more naturalistic style can never be.
Fans of the Mabuse films, which number many more than just Lang's three, are sometimes disappointed by this first incarnation. This Mabuse allows himself violent emotional outbursts, while the later version is marked by icy self-control. The more familiar Mabuse may be an improvement over this one, but they don't quite replace him, and those films don't quite replace this one. This is a treasure for film historians, and indirectly a treasure for fans of the countless movies influenced by it.
For those who simply want a good movie, there's plenty here to reward them, provided they are very, very patient.
Lang's storytelling techniques are especially innovative, but later spy films, including Lang's own, have greatly improved on what's here and leave modern viewers alert to the slow pace, murky details and confusing plot twists. What hasn't been improved upon is the artistry behind the photographic effects. I don't mean the effects themselves: modern special effects are infinitely more sophisticated. This film's effects have a great impact even—or especially—on today's viewer who is accustomed to a rapid-fire series of elaborate, gaudy computer-generated pictures, like those in, say, Peter Jackson's "King Kong." Nothing in that film is as memorable to me as this movie's scene where the camera closes in on Mabuse and everything around him goes dark, leaving only one glowing, malevolent head floating in the blackness.
The highly exaggerated style of acting from everyone in the cast would look idiotic if seen in isolated bits. Von Welk (Bernhard Goetzke), tilting back his head and crossing his eyes as Mabuse (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) hypnotizes him, would have been a perfect clip for Jay Ward's "Fractured Flickers." As part of this film, every melodramatic moment from the cast is effective in a way that a more naturalistic style can never be.
Fans of the Mabuse films, which number many more than just Lang's three, are sometimes disappointed by this first incarnation. This Mabuse allows himself violent emotional outbursts, while the later version is marked by icy self-control. The more familiar Mabuse may be an improvement over this one, but they don't quite replace him, and those films don't quite replace this one. This is a treasure for film historians, and indirectly a treasure for fans of the countless movies influenced by it.
For those who simply want a good movie, there's plenty here to reward them, provided they are very, very patient.
- J. Spurlin
- Feb 9, 2007
- Permalink
Fritz Lang's first masterpiece, a four & a half hour double-feature with hardly a moment wasted, has been restored to stunning effect. (WARNING: In the KINO DVD edition, you MUST lower the contrast & brightness levels to reveal the full grey scale.) On one level, this is simply a far-fetched, but smashingly entertaining detective drama about Mabuse, a criminal mastermind who shows up in more disguises than Alec Guinness in KIND HEARTS & CORONETS to counterfeit, manipulate the stock exchange, kill personal rivals, run the drug racket and generally lord it over the pursuing police force of the modern city. If Part One offers a more devastating look at the perilous world that was Weimar Germany, there's still plenty of action & schemes left for Part Two. In MABUSE, Lang manages, more than he would in METROPOLIS, to hold all the expressionist elements (design, acting, story construction) in perfect balance. The dynamism for an early '20s pic, (before the era of easy camera movement) is simply phenomenal. And where else will you find an inter-title as glorious as: 'Eat some cocaine, you weakling!'
...from director Fritz Lang, adapted by Thea von Harbou from the book by Norbert Jacques. Dr. Mabuse (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) runs a criminal empire with tentacles in many areas: he manipulates events to predict the stock market, causing panics that he can profit from; he runs clandestine gambling casinos, and uses his powers of hypnosis and mind-control to cheat and win; and he oversees a highly lucrative counterfeiting operation. He operates under a variety of disguises and personas, with only a small inner circle even aware of his existence. His machinations eventually come to the notice of state prosecutor von Wenk (Bernhard Goetzke) who sets about to bring the arch-fiend to justice.
This four and a half hour colossus is split into two parts, and while it is long, it doesn't overstay its welcome. The first 20 minutes, detailing Mabuse's intricate method of causing mayhem at the stock exchange, is extremely well done. Klein-Rogge is magnificent in the title role, transformed into multiple characterizations as the elusive Mabuse obscures his movements through masquerades. Director Lang also employs a number of novel cinematic tricks to convey Mabuse's power, such as his hypnotic suggestions appearing as glowing words that torment his targets. While the film is clearly an indictment on Weimar-era German dissipation and decadence, the character of Mabuse is a bit thornier: Lang claims that he's meant to represent the type of amoral thirst for power that was given rise in the period, and which would lead to Hitler's ascension; others have pointed out the anti-Semitic nature of Mabuse. Whatever the case, Lang's film is a masterpiece of early cinematic crime fiction, and one whose inspiration continues to this day.
This four and a half hour colossus is split into two parts, and while it is long, it doesn't overstay its welcome. The first 20 minutes, detailing Mabuse's intricate method of causing mayhem at the stock exchange, is extremely well done. Klein-Rogge is magnificent in the title role, transformed into multiple characterizations as the elusive Mabuse obscures his movements through masquerades. Director Lang also employs a number of novel cinematic tricks to convey Mabuse's power, such as his hypnotic suggestions appearing as glowing words that torment his targets. While the film is clearly an indictment on Weimar-era German dissipation and decadence, the character of Mabuse is a bit thornier: Lang claims that he's meant to represent the type of amoral thirst for power that was given rise in the period, and which would lead to Hitler's ascension; others have pointed out the anti-Semitic nature of Mabuse. Whatever the case, Lang's film is a masterpiece of early cinematic crime fiction, and one whose inspiration continues to this day.
This is the movie that features one of fist arch-criminals, Dr. Mabuse. A manipulative character, who by hypnosis manipulates people and set them up against each other and steal their money, by letting him play card games against him, while he lets his opponents deliberately loose, even when they have the better cards. He manipulates for more money and the love from respectable woman but also most definitely purely for his own pleasure. It doesn't need to be explained why Dr. Mabuse is evil, he just simply IS. That is what makes a great and memorable movie villain.
Definitely true that the second halve of the movie is better than the first. In the second halve the movie really starts to take pace and form. Does it make the first part obsolete? I think not. It perfectly shows how manipulative Dr. Mabuse and the characters also get strongly developed in it. But yes, it's definitely true that the movie is a long sit. Almost 4 hours is of course a long time (and there even is a longer version). It does not ever make the movie bad or boring but it does make it a bit tiresome at times. The movie also isn't easy to follow but that often is the curse of early narrative full-length movies from the '10's and '20's of the previous century.
For 60% of the movie, the movie concentrates on card games. Some of the sequence involving the games are made to look more exciting and and tense than in any James Bond movie ever had been the case.
The movie uses some good early cinematic ticks and also some interesting storytelling techniques such as some interesting fast flashbacks, to help to remind to the viewer of what happened earlier in the story.
The movie also shows some early film-noir tendencies and other thriller and mystery elements. Not just with its story, psychological thriller elements or style of film-making but also with its characters. The main villain Dr. Mabuse is of course the best example of this. He plays an early full-blooded big movie villain, who is also being accompanied by a couple of typical crook-like looking henchmen. All elements that later would become defining for the genre. The movie is about good versus evil, in good early cinematic form.
Some of the tricks make sure that the movie is filled with a couple of memorable and effective sequences, mainly regarding the manipulative hypnosis sequences, by Dr. Mabuse. It makes the movie highly imaginative and original, though it all obviously is not as revolutionary as the other Fritz Lang classics; "Metropolis" and "M".
Of course by todays standards the acting in the movie is definitely over-the-top. Fritz Lang never casted actors just because of their acting skills but also because of their powerful looks. It all helps to make the early acting in Lang movies still fascinating and powerful to watch. Bernhard Goetzke as the state attorney von Welk is a great 'main-hero' for the movie. Of course Rudolf Klein-Rogge is also great as Dr. Mabuse and so is Alfred Abel, though I liked him in "Metropolis" even better.
Definitely worth seeing, if you can handle its long running time.
9/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Definitely true that the second halve of the movie is better than the first. In the second halve the movie really starts to take pace and form. Does it make the first part obsolete? I think not. It perfectly shows how manipulative Dr. Mabuse and the characters also get strongly developed in it. But yes, it's definitely true that the movie is a long sit. Almost 4 hours is of course a long time (and there even is a longer version). It does not ever make the movie bad or boring but it does make it a bit tiresome at times. The movie also isn't easy to follow but that often is the curse of early narrative full-length movies from the '10's and '20's of the previous century.
For 60% of the movie, the movie concentrates on card games. Some of the sequence involving the games are made to look more exciting and and tense than in any James Bond movie ever had been the case.
The movie uses some good early cinematic ticks and also some interesting storytelling techniques such as some interesting fast flashbacks, to help to remind to the viewer of what happened earlier in the story.
The movie also shows some early film-noir tendencies and other thriller and mystery elements. Not just with its story, psychological thriller elements or style of film-making but also with its characters. The main villain Dr. Mabuse is of course the best example of this. He plays an early full-blooded big movie villain, who is also being accompanied by a couple of typical crook-like looking henchmen. All elements that later would become defining for the genre. The movie is about good versus evil, in good early cinematic form.
Some of the tricks make sure that the movie is filled with a couple of memorable and effective sequences, mainly regarding the manipulative hypnosis sequences, by Dr. Mabuse. It makes the movie highly imaginative and original, though it all obviously is not as revolutionary as the other Fritz Lang classics; "Metropolis" and "M".
Of course by todays standards the acting in the movie is definitely over-the-top. Fritz Lang never casted actors just because of their acting skills but also because of their powerful looks. It all helps to make the early acting in Lang movies still fascinating and powerful to watch. Bernhard Goetzke as the state attorney von Welk is a great 'main-hero' for the movie. Of course Rudolf Klein-Rogge is also great as Dr. Mabuse and so is Alfred Abel, though I liked him in "Metropolis" even better.
Definitely worth seeing, if you can handle its long running time.
9/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
- Boba_Fett1138
- Mar 9, 2007
- Permalink
Dr. Mabuse is a master criminal. He and his gang organize a theft of a contract between Holland and Switzerland. In the ensuing market crash, he is able to clean up and then sell when it rebounds after the contract is recovered. In the next scam, he hypnotizes Edgar Hull, son of a rich family, and wins massively gambling against him. Hull is left with a 150k Mark debt despite having no memory of the loss. Prosecutor Von Wenk is investigating a series of similar gambling scams and nobody has any memory of the incidents.
I saw the 3 hr 50 version. It is an early silent classic. It brings a dark crime drama to the screen. Director Fritz Lang is pushing the envelop. The running length is a little daunting. Dr. Mabuse is a great character. I like the movie whenever he's on the screen. The protagonist Von Wenk doesn't show up until much later and isn't quite as compelling. There is the memorable circular gambling stage but Lang could have done more with that. There are many differences from more modern films. It would definitely be much tighter if made now. There is plenty of great work. This is exceptional for its time.
I saw the 3 hr 50 version. It is an early silent classic. It brings a dark crime drama to the screen. Director Fritz Lang is pushing the envelop. The running length is a little daunting. Dr. Mabuse is a great character. I like the movie whenever he's on the screen. The protagonist Von Wenk doesn't show up until much later and isn't quite as compelling. There is the memorable circular gambling stage but Lang could have done more with that. There are many differences from more modern films. It would definitely be much tighter if made now. There is plenty of great work. This is exceptional for its time.
- SnoopyStyle
- Apr 20, 2016
- Permalink
Highlights:
Lowlights:
I love Lang and what he was going for here, but would recommend the second film in the trilogy, The Testament of Dr. Mabuse (1933) over this one. Tellingly, that one clocks in at just over two hours. It also has a more engaging detective and love story. I feel bad dinging the review score a bit given how pioneering the film was and all of its positives, but I have to be true to my enjoyment level too.
- Dr. Mabuse. He's a prototype for so many villains in film history, and as master manipulator who preys on people's fears and exercises mind control over them, is evil in an insidious way. He also bullies his minions and disposes of people after they're no longer useful to him, a true loner with no empathy for humanity. Rudolf Klein-Rogge's look and performance are mesmerizing, no pun intended.
- Fantastic sets with lots of Expressionist touches and art, particularly at the Count's house. Director Fritz Lang combines these with big architectural spaces and excellent mise en scène.
- The sequence at the beginning, with a highly coordinated robbery of a trade agreement from a train, looks straight out of a modern action movie. This transitions to Mabuse manipulating the stock market as he stands over agitated traders, both of which are memorable scenes.
- Lots of other little touches. The noxious gas in the taxi, released at the pull of a lever. The "Chinese glasses", whose reflections are used to confuse and befuddle. The eerie group of blind men helping to count counterfeit money. The tunnel escape. All cool stuff.
- The countess (Gertrude Welcker). Looking for something more out of life, and in her languid eyes you can just see the sentiment behind lines like "I need in life a strong breath of extraordinary thrills and adventures; but, I fear such things have become extinct."
- "Take some cocaine, you wimp!" I chuckled over this line, and coming as it did late in the movie (see below lowlight), imagined it being a directive aimed at flagging audience members.
- Captures the zeitgeist of the times - the chaos of the early Weimar Republic, its economic hardships, and those who antagonized and inflamed people to control them. Mabuse references Nietzsche's will to power, and clearly sees himself as an Übermensch, ideas that also appealed to the emerging Nazi party. "I feel like a state within a state with which I have always been at war!" he bellows, seeming to channel the frustrations of the nationalists.
Lowlights:
- Far, far too long. Probably about two hours too long for the story. The average film length in 1922 was roughly 70 minutes, and at 270 minutes - four and a half hours - this film is nearly four times that. When you combine that with a pace that is often slow and methodical - about average for the period - whew, you're in for a haul, regardless of whether you break your viewing up or damn the consequences and strap yourself in (preferably with a lot of strong black coffee).
- Verbose intertitles. Perhaps a microcosm of the film's bigger issue, the younger Lang didn't seem to understand the value of concision.
I love Lang and what he was going for here, but would recommend the second film in the trilogy, The Testament of Dr. Mabuse (1933) over this one. Tellingly, that one clocks in at just over two hours. It also has a more engaging detective and love story. I feel bad dinging the review score a bit given how pioneering the film was and all of its positives, but I have to be true to my enjoyment level too.
- gbill-74877
- Jan 16, 2019
- Permalink
- Polaris_DiB
- Mar 18, 2007
- Permalink
Dr. Mabuse has an interesting story and the character certainly is iconic, however 4+ hours is entirely unnecessary. 60-70% of this movie could have been cut with very little impact to the narrative.
I would like to see a remake, as although this is a pioneering work, it is incredibly boring. I felt like I was watching the same scene over and over again.
I've given it a 7 because of when it was made but really I think it's a 6. There are other films made around the same time that are more entertaining.
Glad I checked it out but I doubt I'll bother with any of the sequels
I would like to see a remake, as although this is a pioneering work, it is incredibly boring. I felt like I was watching the same scene over and over again.
I've given it a 7 because of when it was made but really I think it's a 6. There are other films made around the same time that are more entertaining.
Glad I checked it out but I doubt I'll bother with any of the sequels
- Lord_of_the_Things
- Jan 5, 2021
- Permalink
After watching this movie -- which has an immense reputation and less than immense execution, one wonders -- what gets a movie in the pantheon of great films? Is it reputation of the director? Is it the fact this movie probably is the first noteworthy film featuring a super-villain? Is it the good reviews from 1922? Or is it that the sequel to this movie (Testament of Dr. Mabuse) is brilliant, and, frankly, everything this one is supposed to be? Watching this film -- it is hard to figure out the answer. Because this film is a pretty good example of a talented filmmaker gone wrong, rather than anything intrinsically brilliant.
First of all, this film is far, far too long. Much of the film is spent with the exposition of Dr. Mabuse's fiendish plots, which are somewhat less, well, earth-shatteringly fiendish than one might expect. There are long scenes of silent actors chatting in front of indifferent sets, with lengthy title cards outlining the Doctor's miserable plots, or the investigator's complicated investigations.
Second, rather surprisingly for a film this length, the characters are not well developed. Mabuse, as a human being (as opposed to a mannequin for the makeup artist's art) really does not emerge until the second hour of the film. The film's only interesting character -- the countess who is so bored with life that she goes to the gambling dens to watch everyone else destroy themselves -- gets good moments in the second half of part one, but then just becomes a damsel in distress for most of the second part.
Third -- quite honestly, the plot is stupid. The great scheme occupying Mabuse for the bulk of this picture is the good doctor using his skills at hypnotism and disguise to force rich people to lose to him at cards. He could have saved us all a lot of bother if he just hypnotized those same rich people to write him a check. While, in many films of this type, the plots are equally daft, one is forced to spend more time with it because of the length of the film. There are plot twists in this movie that would be embarrassing in a B minus PRC film featuring Lionel Atwill. And, in this one, we get the prototype of a villain so in love with complicated methods of murder, that he has trouble actually getting his murder's accomplished.
Fourth, for a crime film, the action scenes just aren't that suspenseful. This a bit of surprise -- in Lang's immediately preceding film "Destiny" -- he displays an extraordinary mastery of pacing, and generating suspense. But in that movie, Lang crowds a lot of plot in a reasonably brief running time and creates a core of sympathetic characters. In this one, there really is not all that much going on for large spaces of the film, and the main character is decidedly not sympathetic.
This is not to say this is a bad film. It isn't. There are some great sequences scattered here and there =-- particularly when Mabuse and the investigator out to destroy him sit down to a game of cards. Also, there is no denying that it has been influential. But, if you are searching out good Mabuse, The Testament of Dr Mabuse is a better choice.
First of all, this film is far, far too long. Much of the film is spent with the exposition of Dr. Mabuse's fiendish plots, which are somewhat less, well, earth-shatteringly fiendish than one might expect. There are long scenes of silent actors chatting in front of indifferent sets, with lengthy title cards outlining the Doctor's miserable plots, or the investigator's complicated investigations.
Second, rather surprisingly for a film this length, the characters are not well developed. Mabuse, as a human being (as opposed to a mannequin for the makeup artist's art) really does not emerge until the second hour of the film. The film's only interesting character -- the countess who is so bored with life that she goes to the gambling dens to watch everyone else destroy themselves -- gets good moments in the second half of part one, but then just becomes a damsel in distress for most of the second part.
Third -- quite honestly, the plot is stupid. The great scheme occupying Mabuse for the bulk of this picture is the good doctor using his skills at hypnotism and disguise to force rich people to lose to him at cards. He could have saved us all a lot of bother if he just hypnotized those same rich people to write him a check. While, in many films of this type, the plots are equally daft, one is forced to spend more time with it because of the length of the film. There are plot twists in this movie that would be embarrassing in a B minus PRC film featuring Lionel Atwill. And, in this one, we get the prototype of a villain so in love with complicated methods of murder, that he has trouble actually getting his murder's accomplished.
Fourth, for a crime film, the action scenes just aren't that suspenseful. This a bit of surprise -- in Lang's immediately preceding film "Destiny" -- he displays an extraordinary mastery of pacing, and generating suspense. But in that movie, Lang crowds a lot of plot in a reasonably brief running time and creates a core of sympathetic characters. In this one, there really is not all that much going on for large spaces of the film, and the main character is decidedly not sympathetic.
This is not to say this is a bad film. It isn't. There are some great sequences scattered here and there =-- particularly when Mabuse and the investigator out to destroy him sit down to a game of cards. Also, there is no denying that it has been influential. But, if you are searching out good Mabuse, The Testament of Dr Mabuse is a better choice.
- alonzoiii-1
- May 8, 2010
- Permalink
Lang is indisputably one of the greatest of the German Expressionist directors and with films like Dr. Mabuse and Metropolis (1927) under his belt I think it is fair to say that he was one of the greatest directors to have ever worked. This, his grand tale of gangsters, mind control, deceit, and deception, is one piece in the long list of proof for this claim.
Dr. Mabuse tells the strange tale of the titular crime-lord (Rudolph Klein-Rogge) as he swindles the rich through the use of mysterious powers of mind control, manipulates the stock market, and ruthlessly murders all those who stand in his way, all the while being relentlessly hounded by the virtuous State Prosecutor Von Wenk (Bernhard Goetzke). The intrigue runs deep, the mysteries run deeper, and the whole story is riveting from beginning to end.
This short synopsis, however, is one of the shallowest looks at the film that one could imagine. There is so much more to Dr. Mabuse than a simple crime story: it is a masterful critique of the overwhelming decadence of the upper classes of Berlin, it is a biting sneer in the face of ruthless capitalism, it is an interesting look into the power men hold over each other, but most importantly it is a great work of art.
I will not waste too much time talking about Lang's masterful use of lighting and shadows, his grand shot compositions, or his inventive use of cinematic effects as these are all things that are so readily apparent in his Weimar films that it would be needless to rant about them here. What I will talk about, however, is what a sheer delight it is to be able to have access to a film such as this in the modern day. I mean, such a regular turnover of films through the cinema and DVD markets with such huge leaps and bounds being made how film is presented and what one can do with visual effects might lead some to lose sight of the rich history of narrative cinema, but with groups like the F.W Murnau Stiftung painstakingly tracking down prints of the classics of early cinema, restoring them, and making them readily available to the public one cannot lose too much heart. We, the cinema lovers of the world, have the ability (or the privilege) to experience the films in which so much of the early hard work was done, and that, too me, is one of the finest things that can happen.
So, my suggestion to you all is to track down of copy of Dr. Mabuse and set yourself aside the four to five hours it takes to watch it (different versions of the film run for differing lengths of time) and really immerse yourself in its art. It is well worth the time and the intellectual effort, with the joys that come from viewing a film as well executed as this reminding cine-philes what their love of the craft is all about.
Dr. Mabuse tells the strange tale of the titular crime-lord (Rudolph Klein-Rogge) as he swindles the rich through the use of mysterious powers of mind control, manipulates the stock market, and ruthlessly murders all those who stand in his way, all the while being relentlessly hounded by the virtuous State Prosecutor Von Wenk (Bernhard Goetzke). The intrigue runs deep, the mysteries run deeper, and the whole story is riveting from beginning to end.
This short synopsis, however, is one of the shallowest looks at the film that one could imagine. There is so much more to Dr. Mabuse than a simple crime story: it is a masterful critique of the overwhelming decadence of the upper classes of Berlin, it is a biting sneer in the face of ruthless capitalism, it is an interesting look into the power men hold over each other, but most importantly it is a great work of art.
I will not waste too much time talking about Lang's masterful use of lighting and shadows, his grand shot compositions, or his inventive use of cinematic effects as these are all things that are so readily apparent in his Weimar films that it would be needless to rant about them here. What I will talk about, however, is what a sheer delight it is to be able to have access to a film such as this in the modern day. I mean, such a regular turnover of films through the cinema and DVD markets with such huge leaps and bounds being made how film is presented and what one can do with visual effects might lead some to lose sight of the rich history of narrative cinema, but with groups like the F.W Murnau Stiftung painstakingly tracking down prints of the classics of early cinema, restoring them, and making them readily available to the public one cannot lose too much heart. We, the cinema lovers of the world, have the ability (or the privilege) to experience the films in which so much of the early hard work was done, and that, too me, is one of the finest things that can happen.
So, my suggestion to you all is to track down of copy of Dr. Mabuse and set yourself aside the four to five hours it takes to watch it (different versions of the film run for differing lengths of time) and really immerse yourself in its art. It is well worth the time and the intellectual effort, with the joys that come from viewing a film as well executed as this reminding cine-philes what their love of the craft is all about.
- lachlan-mcdougall
- May 14, 2014
- Permalink
Dr. Mabuse: The Gambler (1922)
*** 1/2 (out of 4)
Part one of Fritz Lang's epic two part series as Dr. Mabuse making a potion that will allow him to rob people at the card table but soon one of his former victims and the State Attorney are hot on his trail. Needless to say, this thing is masterfully directed by Lang who builds the perfect underworld and allows a really beautiful and exciting film to take place. The cinematography is also brilliant and the performances are nice as well. There's a bit of a dry spot towards the end but the climax is perfectly executed to make way for part two.
Dr. Mabuse: King of Crime (1922)
*** (out of 4)
Part two of Lang's epic has Dr. Mabuse slowly coming unraveled. I found the first part of the film to be more entertaining overall but the ending to this part can't be topped as it shows Lang in an early stage doing something that would later be seen in M. The ending inside the tunnel and the follow up of Mabuse being "haunted" contains terrific atmosphere and manages to be quite creepy as well. However, the first part of this film really drags in spots mainly because the camera is taken off Mabuse and centers on the other characters, none of which are as interesting as Mabuse. With the two films running nearly four-hours, Lang manages to make a very impressive epic, although some of this could have used some editing.
*** 1/2 (out of 4)
Part one of Fritz Lang's epic two part series as Dr. Mabuse making a potion that will allow him to rob people at the card table but soon one of his former victims and the State Attorney are hot on his trail. Needless to say, this thing is masterfully directed by Lang who builds the perfect underworld and allows a really beautiful and exciting film to take place. The cinematography is also brilliant and the performances are nice as well. There's a bit of a dry spot towards the end but the climax is perfectly executed to make way for part two.
Dr. Mabuse: King of Crime (1922)
*** (out of 4)
Part two of Lang's epic has Dr. Mabuse slowly coming unraveled. I found the first part of the film to be more entertaining overall but the ending to this part can't be topped as it shows Lang in an early stage doing something that would later be seen in M. The ending inside the tunnel and the follow up of Mabuse being "haunted" contains terrific atmosphere and manages to be quite creepy as well. However, the first part of this film really drags in spots mainly because the camera is taken off Mabuse and centers on the other characters, none of which are as interesting as Mabuse. With the two films running nearly four-hours, Lang manages to make a very impressive epic, although some of this could have used some editing.
- Michael_Elliott
- Feb 28, 2008
- Permalink
- Dr_Coulardeau
- Jun 13, 2010
- Permalink
- pontifikator
- Feb 23, 2011
- Permalink
Following their ruinous defeat during the War, Germany found itself in what is now commonly referred to as the Weimar era. It's a uniquely fascinating point in the country's history dominated by a stark contrast between impoverished casualties of war and lavishly wealthy benefactors soaking in aloof decadence. This divide between societal poles was not exactly one unlikely to be crossed by any daring enough to grab a boat and travel the uncertain waters however, and director Fritz Lang frequently visits this idea throughout his first major feature film still highly regarded to this day. Bouncing back and forth between seedy gangsters, the hoity-toity elite and those unfortunate enough to be tasked with keeping everything in order (the law), Lang embellishes his film with a unique and varied palette of both character and tone for its time.
Based on the novel Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler by Norbert Jacques, the story follows psychoanalyst-by-day, underground-criminal-mastermind- by-night Dr. Mabuse as he manipulates his way up the rungs of society seemingly with ease through various nefarious means including stock market manipulation and psychological mind-control during card games at high-profile gambling joints. The central theme here warns of granting overwhelming dominance through terror and misdirection at the hands of a charismatic megalomaniac misleading an already misled and fractured society; a warning that evidently fell on deaf ears before the eventual rise of the national socialists a little more than decade later, at which point Lang promptly packed his bags and headed for the States. While at its heart The Gambler may simply be something of a proto-noir gangster movie with light fantasy elements, lurking somewhere in the foreboding shadows that dominate most the film's sets is a thinly-veiled socio-political commentary that can—for the most part—be a fascinating and engrossing thriller all at the same time.
Mabuse is played by Rudolf Klein-Rogge, best known these days as Rotwang the Inventor from Lang's most famous film Metropolis released five years following The Gambler. While his performance in the science-fiction epic is limited but nevertheless memorable, it's a true delight to see him take center stage here as he delivers an iconic performance of the mad-but-brilliant Dr. Mabuse. As one of the character's central traits is psychological manipulation which he delivers through various fictional guises to further distract his victims, Klein-Rogge is given plenty of room to jump between personas which vary between the bizarre and ruthlessly callous, all of which he excels in bringing to life vividly. Supporting actors and actresses back up the leading man well, specifically Alfred Abel (also of limited Metropolis fame) and Gertrude Welcker who together play a husband and wife soon at the mercy of Mabuse's twisted puppeteer hands. Bernhard Goetzke is fine as State prosecutor Norbert von Wenk, but his character sticks too closely to convention to make him stand out as anything more than a pawn serving as the plot's catalyst to chug along with its rich character drama.
Those who have seen Metropolis and are less familiar with Lang's earlier works may be surprised or disappointed by the director's more restrained approach to expressionist sets and effects here in The Gambler. While his contemporaries at the time, Murnau (Nosferatu) and Wiene (Caligari), had fervently adopted the popular art movement in their respective films from the early 20s, Lang was still something of a critic and instead opted to lightly season Mabuse, rather than to glaze it every 15 minutes. Nevertheless, much of the film's most memorable and compelling moments arise from these experiments in expressionism that often mirror the film's otherwise dark and brooding atmosphere with surreal imagery that conveys the characters' inner madness, isolation, torment and despair. It's no wonder then that Lang would go on to make Die Nibelungen and Metropolis, each one more expressionist and surreal than the last.
So having said all that, it must also be noted that The Gambler is somewhere near 270 minutes long. What I've highlighted above are areas where around two-thirds of that runtime fully take advantage of what Mabuse has to offer. The other third is more problematic and occurs mostly during its middle section where the cat-and-mouse game between Mabuse and Norbert von Wenk goes around in circles. Though there are highlights here and there, a long stretch of 90 or so minutes occurs that feels like it could have been chopped down to 30 without much consequence other than to make the pace of the film easier to digest. And yes, I know the movie is in fact a two-part deal, but the fact that this means the first movie's ending is lacklustre and the second movie's opening lacks the enthralling immediacy of its predecessor doesn't change anything and still hurts an otherwise well-paced film.
Dr. Mabuse's first outing on the big screen is for the most part a rewarding and compelling experience, but nevertheless presents the viewer with a challenging middle half that tugs along lethargically rather than with the brisk pace that bookends the feature. However frustrating this section can be however, The Gambler remains as a feature that does a lot well and very little poorly. And thanks to a wonderfully memorable performance by Klein-Rogge backed up by an equally haunting atmosphere, rich cast of diverse characters and otherwise thrilling plot, Fritz Lang's 1922 testament to Germany's Weimar era is a captivating classic, not without its flaws, but also not one to be overlooked either.
Based on the novel Dr. Mabuse, der Spieler by Norbert Jacques, the story follows psychoanalyst-by-day, underground-criminal-mastermind- by-night Dr. Mabuse as he manipulates his way up the rungs of society seemingly with ease through various nefarious means including stock market manipulation and psychological mind-control during card games at high-profile gambling joints. The central theme here warns of granting overwhelming dominance through terror and misdirection at the hands of a charismatic megalomaniac misleading an already misled and fractured society; a warning that evidently fell on deaf ears before the eventual rise of the national socialists a little more than decade later, at which point Lang promptly packed his bags and headed for the States. While at its heart The Gambler may simply be something of a proto-noir gangster movie with light fantasy elements, lurking somewhere in the foreboding shadows that dominate most the film's sets is a thinly-veiled socio-political commentary that can—for the most part—be a fascinating and engrossing thriller all at the same time.
Mabuse is played by Rudolf Klein-Rogge, best known these days as Rotwang the Inventor from Lang's most famous film Metropolis released five years following The Gambler. While his performance in the science-fiction epic is limited but nevertheless memorable, it's a true delight to see him take center stage here as he delivers an iconic performance of the mad-but-brilliant Dr. Mabuse. As one of the character's central traits is psychological manipulation which he delivers through various fictional guises to further distract his victims, Klein-Rogge is given plenty of room to jump between personas which vary between the bizarre and ruthlessly callous, all of which he excels in bringing to life vividly. Supporting actors and actresses back up the leading man well, specifically Alfred Abel (also of limited Metropolis fame) and Gertrude Welcker who together play a husband and wife soon at the mercy of Mabuse's twisted puppeteer hands. Bernhard Goetzke is fine as State prosecutor Norbert von Wenk, but his character sticks too closely to convention to make him stand out as anything more than a pawn serving as the plot's catalyst to chug along with its rich character drama.
Those who have seen Metropolis and are less familiar with Lang's earlier works may be surprised or disappointed by the director's more restrained approach to expressionist sets and effects here in The Gambler. While his contemporaries at the time, Murnau (Nosferatu) and Wiene (Caligari), had fervently adopted the popular art movement in their respective films from the early 20s, Lang was still something of a critic and instead opted to lightly season Mabuse, rather than to glaze it every 15 minutes. Nevertheless, much of the film's most memorable and compelling moments arise from these experiments in expressionism that often mirror the film's otherwise dark and brooding atmosphere with surreal imagery that conveys the characters' inner madness, isolation, torment and despair. It's no wonder then that Lang would go on to make Die Nibelungen and Metropolis, each one more expressionist and surreal than the last.
So having said all that, it must also be noted that The Gambler is somewhere near 270 minutes long. What I've highlighted above are areas where around two-thirds of that runtime fully take advantage of what Mabuse has to offer. The other third is more problematic and occurs mostly during its middle section where the cat-and-mouse game between Mabuse and Norbert von Wenk goes around in circles. Though there are highlights here and there, a long stretch of 90 or so minutes occurs that feels like it could have been chopped down to 30 without much consequence other than to make the pace of the film easier to digest. And yes, I know the movie is in fact a two-part deal, but the fact that this means the first movie's ending is lacklustre and the second movie's opening lacks the enthralling immediacy of its predecessor doesn't change anything and still hurts an otherwise well-paced film.
Dr. Mabuse's first outing on the big screen is for the most part a rewarding and compelling experience, but nevertheless presents the viewer with a challenging middle half that tugs along lethargically rather than with the brisk pace that bookends the feature. However frustrating this section can be however, The Gambler remains as a feature that does a lot well and very little poorly. And thanks to a wonderfully memorable performance by Klein-Rogge backed up by an equally haunting atmosphere, rich cast of diverse characters and otherwise thrilling plot, Fritz Lang's 1922 testament to Germany's Weimar era is a captivating classic, not without its flaws, but also not one to be overlooked either.
Dr.Mabuse,the Gambler is a very long film that has a very slow pace and its themes are having a lot of things to say in that said very long runtime and in some moments this film suceedes in that and it has a lot of things that films in future will borrow from it and it was perhaps the first film that actually had a real super villain in history but to me this film was little to long and i was checking my watch in a second portion of this film,Im sure that lovers of dramas and German cinema fanatics will adore this film,but i think that Fritz Lang has far better films then this one
- marmar-69780
- Dec 13, 2020
- Permalink
There was no chance of me passing on 'Dr Mabuse the Gambler'. Really admire Fritz Lang as a director and really like to love most of his films, even lesser films of his are better than the lesser films of most other directors. Sorry for sounding cliched there, just my thoughts. Also highly appreciate silent film and there are many great ones, and not just those of Lang. FW Murnau, the best of DW Griffith and the best of early King Vidor as well. The best also being visual achievements and massively influential.
Did say in my review for 'The Testament of Dr Mabuse' that that film was just as good as this film 'Dr Mabuse the Gambler'. Reflecting on that opinion since, actually personally think that 'The Testament of Dr Mabuse' is the slightly better film while finding both extremely good. While 'Dr Mabuse the Gambler' is more influential, a little more important and Mabuse is a little more interesting here, 'The Testament of Dr Mabuse' is perhaps the more accessible film. It has a brisker pace, has a little more going on and anybody that found the very long length of 'Gambler' (along with perhaps 'Greed' it's the longest silent film and one of the longest films in history) a problem will appreciate that film's shorter length. Is all of that meaning me being disparaging this film. Absolutely not, there is so much brilliant here and there is a huge amount of respect for it.
Will start with what could have been better. Do agree with those that think that the first half is better than the second. Brisker, more content narratively and more "entertaining". The second half is still incredibly well crafted, but the film does drag badly three quarters of the way through (so the first portion of this half) and becomes reliant on a few too many coincidental plot twists and overlong intertitles.
A few have said too about the other characters outside of the titular character not being anywhere near as interesting. Do mostly agree with this and it is when the film starts to focus more on them when it begins to lose momentum. Though Von Wenk and his conflict with Mabuse is very compelling and suspensefully handled.
However, visually like with any Lang film, 'Dr Mabuse the Gambler' looks superb. Especially at the beginning and all the extravagant interiors. It is hugely atmospheric, imaginatively designed and very striking photography that enhances the unease and is wonderfully dream-like and nightmarish. So many images that will be hard to forget. The score looms ominously and there are clever and never cheap or discordant use of sound effects. Lang's direction is on point too.
Although issues were found with the second half, the first half is wonderful. Very entertaining (the more satirical parts being very sharp and quite bold for back then), often with a real sense of unease and never less than intriguing. Mabuse is to me easily one of the most interesting and most evil early screen villains, Rudolf Klein-Rogge embodying that with a magnetic and often frightening presence.
In summation, very, very good and nearly great despite the sadly inferior second half. 8/10
Did say in my review for 'The Testament of Dr Mabuse' that that film was just as good as this film 'Dr Mabuse the Gambler'. Reflecting on that opinion since, actually personally think that 'The Testament of Dr Mabuse' is the slightly better film while finding both extremely good. While 'Dr Mabuse the Gambler' is more influential, a little more important and Mabuse is a little more interesting here, 'The Testament of Dr Mabuse' is perhaps the more accessible film. It has a brisker pace, has a little more going on and anybody that found the very long length of 'Gambler' (along with perhaps 'Greed' it's the longest silent film and one of the longest films in history) a problem will appreciate that film's shorter length. Is all of that meaning me being disparaging this film. Absolutely not, there is so much brilliant here and there is a huge amount of respect for it.
Will start with what could have been better. Do agree with those that think that the first half is better than the second. Brisker, more content narratively and more "entertaining". The second half is still incredibly well crafted, but the film does drag badly three quarters of the way through (so the first portion of this half) and becomes reliant on a few too many coincidental plot twists and overlong intertitles.
A few have said too about the other characters outside of the titular character not being anywhere near as interesting. Do mostly agree with this and it is when the film starts to focus more on them when it begins to lose momentum. Though Von Wenk and his conflict with Mabuse is very compelling and suspensefully handled.
However, visually like with any Lang film, 'Dr Mabuse the Gambler' looks superb. Especially at the beginning and all the extravagant interiors. It is hugely atmospheric, imaginatively designed and very striking photography that enhances the unease and is wonderfully dream-like and nightmarish. So many images that will be hard to forget. The score looms ominously and there are clever and never cheap or discordant use of sound effects. Lang's direction is on point too.
Although issues were found with the second half, the first half is wonderful. Very entertaining (the more satirical parts being very sharp and quite bold for back then), often with a real sense of unease and never less than intriguing. Mabuse is to me easily one of the most interesting and most evil early screen villains, Rudolf Klein-Rogge embodying that with a magnetic and often frightening presence.
In summation, very, very good and nearly great despite the sadly inferior second half. 8/10
- TheLittleSongbird
- Mar 11, 2020
- Permalink
Fritz Lang puts on a show, with an assortment of confusing, but entertaining situations. The auteur in his earlier years, combining a complex rollercoaster of a story with different odd situations, revolving around a mysterious man named Dr. Mabuse, who is a master at mind control. He operates, with an assortment of disguises, as he easily manipulates his prey, most notably, gamblers.
Lang takes a popular character from literature of the time and turns him into a box-office hit. Made in Germany, this film was initially released a month apart in two chapters, in what could be called, the 1922 version of a 2-Part TV mini-series. A precursor to something that wouldn't happen until the 1970s. But, subsequent releases, shortly after, around the world, combined the two parts into what it looks like today. A four and a half hour spectacle of silent film proportions. Another groundbreaking achievement made in the roaring 20s.
But, this meticulous look at the life of a evil madman is confusing sometimes. Lang presents maybe too much information, which hinders the film. The lengthy look at this story gets slammed to a halt when the plot is force fed to you through notes, letters and title cards instead of just taking you to these situations too. It's not just the runtime of the full film. If you take the two parts, which by the way, each part is made up of four or five other little parts, each half of the film is still 2:15 each, in length. A lot to take in. I'm assuming if it was a box office hit in 1922 and that may be because of repeat viewings by people, who enjoyed it, but felt they missed something, like me. I watched it twice.
But, that is really all that was amiss here. The technical, structure and effects are very good for the early 1920s. Lang's use of mood, lighting, contrast is perfect. Also, give credit to the actors, makeup and costumes. They all look convincing in their mysterious ways. I always say, when it comes to basic filmmaking techniques, like editing, lighting and basic story-telling, I am going to be more critical on newer movies than old ones, but by this time in the timeline, Film was about 25 years old. So editing and effects are more archaic and still in, somewhat of, an infancy. So, when you see the scene, near the beginning of the film, that takes place on the train, don't be upset that the man is staring out a window that has a white screen pulled over it. My guess, is they wanted to matt footage of what is happening outside and they must have run into a technical issue. That is why they went with just the white window screen and a curtain on the sides instead.
The restoration that is available was able to fix a lot of the missing titles and fix many things that needed repair for the DVD release. The music accompaniment that was used is dead on prefect and it really sounds like they tried hard to mimic what was desired for the initial 1922 release. If you can search out this version, the most recent restoration that you can find, the full four and a half hour version, do so.
7.5 (C+ MyGrade) = 7 IMDB.
Lang takes a popular character from literature of the time and turns him into a box-office hit. Made in Germany, this film was initially released a month apart in two chapters, in what could be called, the 1922 version of a 2-Part TV mini-series. A precursor to something that wouldn't happen until the 1970s. But, subsequent releases, shortly after, around the world, combined the two parts into what it looks like today. A four and a half hour spectacle of silent film proportions. Another groundbreaking achievement made in the roaring 20s.
But, this meticulous look at the life of a evil madman is confusing sometimes. Lang presents maybe too much information, which hinders the film. The lengthy look at this story gets slammed to a halt when the plot is force fed to you through notes, letters and title cards instead of just taking you to these situations too. It's not just the runtime of the full film. If you take the two parts, which by the way, each part is made up of four or five other little parts, each half of the film is still 2:15 each, in length. A lot to take in. I'm assuming if it was a box office hit in 1922 and that may be because of repeat viewings by people, who enjoyed it, but felt they missed something, like me. I watched it twice.
But, that is really all that was amiss here. The technical, structure and effects are very good for the early 1920s. Lang's use of mood, lighting, contrast is perfect. Also, give credit to the actors, makeup and costumes. They all look convincing in their mysterious ways. I always say, when it comes to basic filmmaking techniques, like editing, lighting and basic story-telling, I am going to be more critical on newer movies than old ones, but by this time in the timeline, Film was about 25 years old. So editing and effects are more archaic and still in, somewhat of, an infancy. So, when you see the scene, near the beginning of the film, that takes place on the train, don't be upset that the man is staring out a window that has a white screen pulled over it. My guess, is they wanted to matt footage of what is happening outside and they must have run into a technical issue. That is why they went with just the white window screen and a curtain on the sides instead.
The restoration that is available was able to fix a lot of the missing titles and fix many things that needed repair for the DVD release. The music accompaniment that was used is dead on prefect and it really sounds like they tried hard to mimic what was desired for the initial 1922 release. If you can search out this version, the most recent restoration that you can find, the full four and a half hour version, do so.
7.5 (C+ MyGrade) = 7 IMDB.
Fritz Lang and his writer Thea van Harbou return to the crime genre they had previously played in with The Spiders films, and they pull from the literary source written by Norbert Jacques about a Moriarty-like criminal genius. A four-and-a-half-hour affair, it shows us the criminal mastermind at his absolute and terrifying height before throwing him to his lowest level possible. It's a metaphor for Weimar Germany, both the decadence and the depravity as well as the inevitable end. I still think it could have used some tightening as well as some elongation of some elements to make certain parts of the story more effective, but it is nonetheless an engrossing film with a strong visual sense at the same time.
The two-part film begins with probably its best single sequence (that has its own share of ridiculous working against it at the same time) where the titular Dr. Mabuse (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) executes an elaborate plan that involves the stealing of a secret trade pact from a courier on a train, leaking the news to the stock market to cause a stock to plummet, and then having the information come out that the pact is intact and delivered without harm to have the same stock skyrocket. He executes this mostly from the shadows except the actual purchase and sale of stock which he completes with a cool demeanor while standing on top of a table on the floor. The rest is pulled off by his handful of lackeys that he keeps to exacting schedules with threats if they do not follow through as he wishes.
That is all a preamble to the actual story, but it's a doozie of a preamble. There are some silly elements to it like the pact getting thrown from a speeding train and falling exactly into the backseat of a speeding car that's moving perpendicular under a bridge just below, but it quickly makes the point and moves on.
The character of Mabuse is an interesting one in that he isn't really driven by money or power. His attainment of riches in his first scheme of the film fills him with no satisfaction. What drives him is, quite simply, messing with people. That's a glib way of putting it, he frames it more about having power over people, and he treats it deadly seriously. However, his desire is simply to exert his will upon others. He only believes in power, and he could reasonably be described as a nihilist. He ends up feeling like a proto-Joker, especially the version in Nolan's The Dark Knight.
The story itself involves Mabuse using one of his many disguises and some kind of psychic power he has learned to influence rich men into gambling situations where they purposefully lose large sums of money to him. He focuses in on a young heir named Hull (Paul Richter), utilizing one of his minions, a dancer named Cara (Aud Egede-Nissen), to help influence him. After an initial encounter that leaves Hull in a debt of 150,000 marks, the police prosecutor von Wenk (Bernhard Goetzke) gets onto Mabuse's tail with Hull's help, bringing in the help of a bored Countess he finds at a secret gambling club named Daisy Told (Gertrude Welcker) who is married to the rich dandy Count Told (Alfred Abel).
It becomes a cat and mouse game as von Wenk tries to figure out Mabuse's real identity, having nothing more than a series of names and physical descriptions that don't match up because of Mabuse's disguises and exacting planning. The first part ends with both women getting kidnapped by the other side. Mabuse, in a fit of what one might call jealous desire, forces Count Told to obviously cheat during a card game at his home and steals away with the Countess in the confusion. At the same time, von Wenk executes a raid on an illegal gambling den where Hull and Cara are, leading to a chase where Mabuse's men accidentally kill Hull rather than von Wenk which leads to von Wenk capturing Cara and throwing her in prison.
The second half has a tighter focus and has Mabuse zeroing in on Count Told, exerting his influence over him to get what he wants, while von Wenk closes in on Mabuse by squeezing Cara. Mabuse gets desperate, sending one of his men into von Wenk's office as an electrician to plant an explosive, but things go wrong. There's a shootout that must have directly inspired Hitchcock when he made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much, and a chase that leads to Mabuse's eventual defeat.
I do enjoy the film overall, but I don't quite see the silent masterpiece that many others seem to see. Mabuse himself is a great character, and he is a wonderful vessel for meaning about contemporary Germany, but I think there's some unclarity around his personal relationships, especially his desires around the Countess. I think it's mostly just about his finding a new target to control, but the opening text of the second part (perhaps in an effort to simplify things in an introduction) says that he loves her. I can see him loving her and only knowing how to control her, but it's unclear. The other side of this is Mabuse's relationship with Cara, a woman who loves him deeply because of their relationship before the film began. I think this relationship is appropriately fleshed out (I dread the idea of a scene with Cara and Mabuse happily frolicking through a field), but I don't think it forms the basis that it should when it comes to Mabuse's obsession with Countess Told.
I also find von Wenk to be an uninteresting antagonist to Mabuse. He's a generic police investigator. He's dedicated and good at what he does, but he's nothing but his role. He has no real character to him. I don't need scenes of him at home with his wife, or anything, but a tic or two might have been nice.
The suspense of the chase is really well handled, and the film looks great. That's the bulk of the film and I enjoy it for that. The ending with Mabuse being terrorized by visions is great as well. I just found some character stuff to be lacking here and there that the film rather heavily relied on. It's not the elegant piece of art that is Destiny, but it's also not the loose collection of ill-fitted ideas that was the second Spiders film. It's solidly good.
The two-part film begins with probably its best single sequence (that has its own share of ridiculous working against it at the same time) where the titular Dr. Mabuse (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) executes an elaborate plan that involves the stealing of a secret trade pact from a courier on a train, leaking the news to the stock market to cause a stock to plummet, and then having the information come out that the pact is intact and delivered without harm to have the same stock skyrocket. He executes this mostly from the shadows except the actual purchase and sale of stock which he completes with a cool demeanor while standing on top of a table on the floor. The rest is pulled off by his handful of lackeys that he keeps to exacting schedules with threats if they do not follow through as he wishes.
That is all a preamble to the actual story, but it's a doozie of a preamble. There are some silly elements to it like the pact getting thrown from a speeding train and falling exactly into the backseat of a speeding car that's moving perpendicular under a bridge just below, but it quickly makes the point and moves on.
The character of Mabuse is an interesting one in that he isn't really driven by money or power. His attainment of riches in his first scheme of the film fills him with no satisfaction. What drives him is, quite simply, messing with people. That's a glib way of putting it, he frames it more about having power over people, and he treats it deadly seriously. However, his desire is simply to exert his will upon others. He only believes in power, and he could reasonably be described as a nihilist. He ends up feeling like a proto-Joker, especially the version in Nolan's The Dark Knight.
The story itself involves Mabuse using one of his many disguises and some kind of psychic power he has learned to influence rich men into gambling situations where they purposefully lose large sums of money to him. He focuses in on a young heir named Hull (Paul Richter), utilizing one of his minions, a dancer named Cara (Aud Egede-Nissen), to help influence him. After an initial encounter that leaves Hull in a debt of 150,000 marks, the police prosecutor von Wenk (Bernhard Goetzke) gets onto Mabuse's tail with Hull's help, bringing in the help of a bored Countess he finds at a secret gambling club named Daisy Told (Gertrude Welcker) who is married to the rich dandy Count Told (Alfred Abel).
It becomes a cat and mouse game as von Wenk tries to figure out Mabuse's real identity, having nothing more than a series of names and physical descriptions that don't match up because of Mabuse's disguises and exacting planning. The first part ends with both women getting kidnapped by the other side. Mabuse, in a fit of what one might call jealous desire, forces Count Told to obviously cheat during a card game at his home and steals away with the Countess in the confusion. At the same time, von Wenk executes a raid on an illegal gambling den where Hull and Cara are, leading to a chase where Mabuse's men accidentally kill Hull rather than von Wenk which leads to von Wenk capturing Cara and throwing her in prison.
The second half has a tighter focus and has Mabuse zeroing in on Count Told, exerting his influence over him to get what he wants, while von Wenk closes in on Mabuse by squeezing Cara. Mabuse gets desperate, sending one of his men into von Wenk's office as an electrician to plant an explosive, but things go wrong. There's a shootout that must have directly inspired Hitchcock when he made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much, and a chase that leads to Mabuse's eventual defeat.
I do enjoy the film overall, but I don't quite see the silent masterpiece that many others seem to see. Mabuse himself is a great character, and he is a wonderful vessel for meaning about contemporary Germany, but I think there's some unclarity around his personal relationships, especially his desires around the Countess. I think it's mostly just about his finding a new target to control, but the opening text of the second part (perhaps in an effort to simplify things in an introduction) says that he loves her. I can see him loving her and only knowing how to control her, but it's unclear. The other side of this is Mabuse's relationship with Cara, a woman who loves him deeply because of their relationship before the film began. I think this relationship is appropriately fleshed out (I dread the idea of a scene with Cara and Mabuse happily frolicking through a field), but I don't think it forms the basis that it should when it comes to Mabuse's obsession with Countess Told.
I also find von Wenk to be an uninteresting antagonist to Mabuse. He's a generic police investigator. He's dedicated and good at what he does, but he's nothing but his role. He has no real character to him. I don't need scenes of him at home with his wife, or anything, but a tic or two might have been nice.
The suspense of the chase is really well handled, and the film looks great. That's the bulk of the film and I enjoy it for that. The ending with Mabuse being terrorized by visions is great as well. I just found some character stuff to be lacking here and there that the film rather heavily relied on. It's not the elegant piece of art that is Destiny, but it's also not the loose collection of ill-fitted ideas that was the second Spiders film. It's solidly good.
- davidmvining
- Aug 18, 2022
- Permalink
- disinterested_spectator
- Jun 26, 2016
- Permalink