Das Testament des Dr. Mabuse

Compared to most films in Hollywood in the 1930s, Fritz Lang's mysterythriller The Testament of Dr. Mabuse is years ahead of the game interms of plot and camera techniques. There are some shots in this moviethat would not be seen until Orson Welles' famous Citizen Kane, whichforever changed the cinema. However, I think it's safe to say that Langwas doing the same thing in Germany at the time when Nazi rule was inthe wake. In this complex and filling story, a veteran criminal with abrilliant mind has been in an insane asylum for ten years yet iswriting memoirs that seem to predict crimes happening outside. TheInspector Lohmann attempts to solve this case, not knowing how strangeand convoluted it really is. Despite the complexity of it, this film israther easy to follow and boasts some great performances and use ofsound. Considering this was only Lang's second film using sound, it isa wonder he did what he could with it. The movie opens with a noisyprint shop and a man hiding behind a huge trunk. The loud and obnoxiousnoise of the printer continues all throughout the scene and shows whatsound can really do to a film. All in all, Lang shows his pioneeringability to use the resources available in ways no one had thought of atthe time. There are hints of German Expressionism here, but mostly justa well-told and engaging detective story that certainly will not ageany time soon.

There's something madly courageous in Fritz Lang's no-holds barred,go-for-broke pre-Hollywood films: the frenetic pacing, the outrageousand highly implausible melodrama straight out of the silent serials,the cross-cutting from scene to scene, the overlapping sound effectsand dissolving imagery, the occasional over the top scenery chewingactors, the expressionistic special effects some of which are startlingto this day and others so fake as to be laughable. And then there arethe sets at the height of the UFA big studio style, which even in 1933outdid Hollywood MGM in lavishness. But, good or bad and more oftenterrific, there is certainly a directorial vision here as unique andunmistakably Lang's as Kubrick's was to be many decades later. Here andin "Metropolis" you are either hanging on to your seats in suspense, orlaughing at the silliness of it all; and yet even in its awfulnessthere is still something quintessentially cinematic in all of Lang'searly German work. Truly the work of a master, if that of a very flawedone.

One of the great directors of all time, Fritz Lang (M) made this filmjust before he escaped Nazi Germany. he was not to return until some 30years later when he made his last film, which also featured Dr. Mabuse.

Of course, I enjoyed watching it in the original German, rather thansome dubbed copy, and it made for a very interesting experience. Langmade what is probably one of the first crime films, and it foreshadowedthe film noir that was to come in the next decade.

His Dr. Mabuse (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) was certainly sinister looking, andthe criminals reminded me of the one I see in old Capone films.

The Police Inspector (Otto Wernicke) was the most interesting characteras he tried to solve the crimes being committed.

The entire film was a visual pleasure with some interestingexpressionistic work during a car chase at the end.

Well worth the time to watch.

This is probably the hardest accessible of Fritz Lang's homegrownoutput. Especially due to a rather un-linear story and the fact that itdoes not have a certain lead character. But it is all nonethelessmasterfully executed and, if you like, explore the boundaries ofgangster movies with several original set pieces that has been copiedover the time. The shady figure hiding behind the curtain? The floodedroom? Or the gunshot deafened by a traffic riot? All classic! Theperformances are fine with Dr. Rotwang (Rudolh Klein) now being Mabuseand Otto Wernicke reprising his Inspector Lohmann character from M. Ialso have the hots for the choice Bauhaus interiors as seen in somescenes. That the mob system is an allegory over the growing Nazi partyis made the most obvious by having the bulldog henchman bearing hairand mustache identical to… well you get the idea. Land knew he wasplaying with fire.

Das Testament Des Dr. Mabuse/The Testament of Dr. Mabuse(1933) is anallegory of the warning about the Nazis quest for world power during thelate 30’s and early 40’s. It was after this movie that the director left todo movies in Hollywood. The tital character is a main influence on thevillains of the James Bond movies. The movie is like a James Bond flickwhere the focus is more on the villain and less on James Bond. Dr. Mabuseis one of the most memorable screen villains in the history of Cinema. Thisfilm can be considered to be the last German Expressionistic movie of thatmovement.

An excellent scene is when a doctor is murdered from another car while beingdistracted by drivers honking car horns(this scene would be seen again inThe 1000 Eyes of Dr. Mabuse(1960), and The Ipcress File(1964)). The moviedeals with the concept of free will, power, genius, and the balance betweenbrillance and insanity. The head doctor represents Adolph Hitler, thehospital represents Germany, and the patients are the people. The criminalelement symbolizes the ghestopo, the Police represent foreign countries, andKent represents the non-conformist. This along with The Big Heat(1953) andMetropolis(1926) are among my favorite Fritz Lang films. Das Testament DesDr. Mabuse/The Testament of Dr. Mabuse(1933) would pave the way for the FilmNoir cycle of the 1940’s and 1950’s plus the spy films of the 1960’s andearly 1970’s.

If you know anything about 30’s and 40’s serials, then you’ll recognize myname, Dr. Satan is stolen from one. I love the cheap things, mainly fortheodd ideas, like the mastermind who communicates with his men by radio, thedeath traps etc. I’ve also enjoyed every Fritz Lang movie I’ve seen sofar.Mabuse is a Fritz Lang serial. I’m not sure if he invented the ideasI’veseen used so many times later, but he certainly puts them out with greaterstyle and skill than the serials ever did. His villain, is the mostintenseI’ve seen, and the concept that he rules his gang from the walls of thesanitarium, and then from beyond the grave is not only spectacular, itswelldone. The subplot, about the good man, who only joined Mabuse because hehad no job, and his girlfriend is weak, however. I understand that itmovesthe plot along, and if you view Mabuse as Hitler than the good man isthereto show how innocents have been swept along with him, but overall thispartof the film is weak. Overall, however, this is a very interestingfilm.

This is the last part of the mad criminal Dr. Mabuse’s story by FritzLang.Made in 1933 in the eve of nazi seizure of power in Germany it reflects alot of the madness that would soon dominate the country. It’s not strange tothis the fact that the scenario was written by Thea von Harbou then wife ofLang. Von Harbou was pro-nazi. But Lang was not so and he escaped fromGermany thus shunning the invitation of Dr. Goebbels to become the movieherald of the regime a role later played by Leni Riefensthal.In this movie which still follows a lot of the expressionist aesthetics thatinspired previous German silent movies (Pabst, Murnau), the story developsitself in good rhythm always catching your attention in successive scenesvery well structured and acted. Of course you must never forget that thetechnical means then available were not those at disposal of any directornowadays. Anyway the movie is technically quite efficient according to itsaims.Like Hitler Mabuse wanted to dominate the world by the terror generated byhis crimes. Of course the movie was never exhibited in Germany during the Nazi era. Dr.Goebbels forbade it.

084: The Testament of Dr. Mabuse (1933) - released in France 4/12/33,viewed 2/6/
07.

The recently elected Nazis under Julius Streicher organize a one-dayboycott of all Jewish-owned businesses in Germany. Beer is legalized inthe U.S.

DOUG: As Hitler's conquest of Germany begins to take hold, Europeanfilmmaker extraordinaire Fritz Lang unleashes one last psychologicalcrime thriller on his home country before divorcing hisNazi-sympathizing wife and skipping town for good to head to Hollywood.And quite a good film it is. It's a sound movie that is a sequel to asilent movie Lang directed years before. Lang shows off a few cooltricks here and there with sound, including a very clever chase in thefilm's opening that culminates in a rather odd, but nonetheless cool,on-screen explosion. Otto Wernicke reprises his role from 'M' asCommissioner Lohmann, who investigates a series of strange crimes inwhich all clues point to criminal mastermind and hypnotist Dr. Mabuse.There's just one problem: Mabuse has been catatonic in a mentalinstitution for years. How can he be overseeing these complex criminaloperations without leaving his cell or talking to anyone? We seeprecious little of Mabuse himself, but like Hans Beckert before him,his presence is everywhere, as criminals and innocents chillinglybecome victims of the mad doctor's strange power; one inspector is sotraumatized by an attempt on his life that he is forced to constantlyrelive the moments before he was almost killed; a member of Mabuse'sgang, hoping to leave his life of crime, is captured along with hisgirlfriend and stuck in a locked room with a ticking bomb he can'tfind; and the man in charge of Mabuse's case, Professor Baum, seemsstrangely obsessed with the doctor's manic journals. Wernicke carriesmost of the film, chewing lots of scenery and cigars while kickingplenty of criminal ass, although he takes a little too long to figureout the final twist. I'm a little surprised the film wasn't remade inHollywood (If it was, it would probably have been 30 minutes shorter,and not as good). What is interesting about the film now is itsallegory on the Nazi takeover that was occurring at the time. Whileother German films seemed to stumble on the darkness creeping acrossthe country by accident, the parallels here seem quite intentional.Mabuse is Hitler, brilliant and psychotic, completely dedicated toevil, influencing others by force of will and malice. Dr. Baumrepresents the population that he has enthralled.

KEVIN: As his once native Germany goes to hell in a handcart, directorFritz Lang delivers his most complex thriller yet, in the sequel to his1922 silent hit 'Dr. Mabuse.' This film, 'The Testament of Dr. Mabuse,'finds the demented hypnotist conducting his criminal empire from hisjail cell. As well as mystery and crime drama, it's also one of thevery few psychological thrillers we've seen. Lang once again uses somespecial effects to depict Mabuse's bizarre machinations. The dementedDoctor, an obvious precursor to psychopaths like Hannibal Lecter, sitsin his jail cell scribbling away on his notes day and night, even whenhe's got nothing to write with. Unlike 'M,' where the so-called villainwas the most fully-formed character, in Mabuse it's the humancharacters that get to shine while the villain is a one-sided master ofevil. Otto Wernicke, evidently reprising his role from 'M' as InspectorLohmann, kicks serious criminal ass as the unkempt Commissioner whowill stop at nothing to get to the bottom of this twisted plot. OscarBeregi plays Dr. Baum, the crazed professor who carries on Mabuse'swork. We are never quite sure how conscious he is of his own villainy.Gustav Diessl is also very good, injecting a surprising romanticinterest that manages to deliver some of the film's best thrills ratherthan detract from them. A tense scene finds him in a locked room withhis girlfriend, a ticking bomb, and no chance of escape. Usually a filmfrom this period running over too hours feels way too long, but'Mabuse' feels just right. The ending is a little confusing, with arelease of poison gas threatening the city in the background while theheroes chase down the villain. And most importantly of all, only aFritz Lang film looks and feels like a Fritz Lang film. There's agrittiness and darkness that most Hollywood movies could only imitate.

Last film: Gabriel Over the White House (1933). Next film: Gold Diggersof 1933 (1933).

Haha, yes!! Throw everything else away, this movie is the real deal!Horror, suspense, crime, drama, political commentary, etc. It'sbasically every damn film that has ever existed, but much better thanall of those! Now, it's not QUITE as good as "M!" the Fritz Lang moviedone right before this. But it's up there.

The fact that this is a Criterion release should be convincing in ofitself that you watch this (although Criterion mysteriously releasesgarbage like "Armageddon" ?!). Not to mention, Lang simultaneouslyfilmed the same film with French actors. What a crazy ambitious dude!

There are a wide range of messages in this baby. The Fuhrer didn't wantyou to see it, thus you should see it. Mandatory viewing.

It’s funny, this is the third-time I have written a review of thisfilm, and I have no-intention of giving-up yet! After reading a few ofthe BFI’s texts (in-particular, "If…."), there was nothing in my textthat violated any of the guidelines of IMDb! Without focusing on IMDbtoo-much, I have to admit the other time was Amazon.com, which shouldbe of no surprise to anyone. So, I’ll sum-it-up: if you have everwondered if there is something wrong with modern-civilization–you arecorrect, and Fritz Lang’s "Testament of Dr. Mabuse" will confirm manyof these deep-seated fears on the abuse of power, and the deceptionsinherent in all-forms of media. Some historical and thematic backgroundilluminates the "Mabuse" mythos more clearly…

Postmoderist writers like Bataille have pointed-out that we areconstantly-assailed by "constructs" or phantoms: is the Osama Bin-Ladenwe "know" anything close to the real one? Our so-called "leaders"? Ofcourse not. Is a "marketplace" economy, or "globalization" exactly whatthey are presented as? Was the Gulf War what we were presented-with? Ofcourse not, and so-on. Lang was certainly ahead-of-his-time in makingall of the Mabuse films, pointing-out the problems we are allfaced-with in our present-modernity.

Fritz Lang, Thea von Harbou, and Norbert Jacques had many models fromtheir own era: numerous war-profiteers, Sidney Reilly, the super-spy,as well as the international arms-trafficker, Basil Zaharoff ("theGreek,"one of Reilly’s main-mentors), not the simple-analogy of risingNational Socialism. And yet, one can find some implied Platonic-thoughtin these themes of a "false-reality," since when is Mabuse ever"Mabuse"–the very-thing itself, or a fake? Lang’s films are likeartichokes and onions–there’s always a new-layer one never suspected.

In "Testament of Dr. Mabuse," we are assaulted with the same themes.Mabuse may reside in a Sanitarium, but his ideas are free-floating,alive. Whether he–or the true-terrorists–are alive-or-dead isimmaterial, both literally and figuratively. Their ideas infect thosewho are already ripe for control, such as the Director of theSanitarium he resides in! He and Mabuse are the same, sowers of thechaos-within. In the end…there is no end to the will-to-power,something off-putting to some who are used-to the "good" winning. InLang’s films, everyone is deeply-flawed, just like real-life.

A must-see, try the Criterion edition which is nearly flawless!! Morethan just a thriller. Lang’s approach is pure-noir before it was even afilm-term. His use of composition has been copied again-and-again,because it is so effective in this film;power-relationships abound ineach tableau. Some have called this one of the last G
ermanExpressionist films, but it really only has elements in a certain sceneyou will spot immediately. Also: the film is finally available in theoriginal aspect-ratio of 1:19-1, with a pristine-transfer from thenegatives and the best extant-materials. This is the real videorevolution! Directors need to draw on Lang’s legacy more, as we mighthave better films to watch.

read comments (0)

42nd Street

A lot of snappy tunes in this movie. Again anything with Dick Powell singingis okay with me

The movie starts out with Warner Baxter playing a washed up musicalproducer who was wiped out in the stock market crash and was locked upin a mental ward. Baxter was a great producer before and had a lot ofhits before and Baxter is desperate for this job. He finally receivesit and then it shows the casting and the rehearsals for the play. BebeDaniels plays a young girl who is trying to get a job and meets DickPowell, who is already staring in the show, and gets her in. RubyKeeler plays the star of the show and Ginger Rogers has a small rolebut turns down the lead when Keeler is injured because she can’t carrythe show and says that Daniels should do it. There isn’t too manymusical numbers until the end and it’s basically showing themrehearsing for the show.

Julian Marsh, an successful Broadway director, produces a new show,inspite of his poor health. The money comes from a rich old man, who isin love with the star of the show, Dorothy Brock. But she doesn't replyhis love, because she is still in love with her old partner. At thenight before the premiere, Dorothy Brock breaks her ankle, and one ofthe chorus girls, Peggey Sawyer tries to take over her part.

RUBY KEELER had a cute little pixie face, a pert spunkiness and thedistressing habit of watching her feet as she tap danced in one clunkynumber after another. But not to worry. Movie fans loved her as if shewas the ultimate in musical talent. Don't forget, this was beforeELEANOR POWELL and FRED ASTAIRE demonstrated what tap dancing talentwas all about. Good movie, but gains lack.

081: 42nd Street (1933) - released 2/2/1933, viewed 8/14/2006.

Adolph Hitler is appointed Chancellor of Germany.

DOUG: The movie musical became extremely popular during the sound era,and within that was a particular type that became relevant during theyears of the Great Depression, one of the only places in the cinema inwhich the difficult times of the day were represented: the BackstageMusical. And backstage musicals don't get much more entertaining than'42nd Street,' a fast-paced song-and-dance ensemble extravaganzadirected by Lloyd Bacon with dance choreography by the legendary BusbyBerkely. The cast combines well-known actors such as Warner Baxter andBebe Daniels with newcomers like Ruby Keeler and Dick Powell (a bit oddthat the only actor I'd ever heard of, Ginger Rogers, was one of thenewbies). Unlike the typical fantasy musical we're most familiar with,'42nd Street' is a down-and-dirty look at the realities behind thecurtain, where the egos clash, the legs shine, and the insults fly.Everyone's got their little dramas going on (it's a little hard to keeptrack, so do pay attention as you watch): Dorothy (Daniels), the leadin the play, is sleeping with Abner (Guy Kibbee), who is putting up themoney for the show, but she's two-timing him with her old vaudevillefriend Denning (George Brent). Peggy Sawyer (Keeler), the naïve,talented chorus girl, longs to prove herself in her first show, but shemay get more than she bargained for. And the director, Julian (Baxter),is dealing with the crushing stress of preparing the show in fiveweeks, coupled with his failing health. The biting one-liners flyamongst the competitive cast and crew, especially from the tight-knitduo of Lorraine (Una Merkel) and Anytime Annie (Rogers) ("It must havebeen hard on your mother not having any children"). The last half-houris a highly memorable sequence of swooping, cinematic dance numbersthat only Busby Berkely could bring. My only problem was Julian'sspeeches to the cast, and particularly to Sawyer later in the film,don't sound very inspirational, and smack of him forcing his anxiety oneveryone else. Still, this is an essential piece of cinema, havingsaved Warner Brothers from bankruptcy and revitalizing the musicalgenre for the 1930s.

KEVIN: Behind the scenes musicals don't get more irresistible than'42nd Street.' Everyone in the diverse ensemble of characters isthoroughly enjoyable throughout. There's so many, you might wisheveryone had nametags (though the opening credits do provide somehelpful shots of the entire cast). It took me several viewings tofollow the seemingly endless cast with their various dramas, affairs,heartbreaks and headaches, and when I finally got it, I saw thateverything clicked. The characters we follow are iconic and memorable.Show star Dorothy Brock (former silent beauty Bebe Daniels) with herexpensive dresses and nightgowns; suave lover Pat Denning (GeorgeBrent); flirty Lorraine (Una Merkel) and spunky Anytime Annie (GingerRogers); bright-eyed Peggy (Ruby Keeler, Mrs. Al Jolson to you); andexasperated stage director Julian Marsh (Warner Baxter), who pops hisprescription pills in between drilling the dancers and actors, just toname a few. I love the scene when Marsh and Jones tiredly discuss thedifficulties they're facing as Barry deals out vaguely relatedone-liners while chomping on his ever-present cigar. The one scene Ihated, though, is Baxter's famous "You've got to come back a star"speech to Peggy. The whole speech sounds as though it would onlysucceed in making her more nervous. The film reportedly mixes newcomerswith established stars, but I recognized almost no one. It would begood to revisit this movie later on, after we see the cast from thisfilm in other memorable roles down the line. The element that makesthis film so amazing to me is this (let me see if I can convey thisright): It is a backstage musical, but when I thought about the makingof the movie, I had great difficulty imagining any behind-the-scenesantics other than what was on screen. Like a möbius strip, I onlythought about the making of the fictional Pretty Lady as though it werea real musical, rather than the making of 42nd Street, which is thereal musical. For example, to see this on stage, we would see thedancers "rehearsing," a scene which in itself would have to berehearsed. So because of this difficulty imagining '42nd Street'actually being produced, everything depicted in the film,tongue-in-cheek and Hollywood-ized as it may be, took on a strange sortof believability.

Last film: She Done Him Wrong (1933). Next film: King Kong (1933).

The surreal parts are the Busby Berkeley numbers and the corn is everythingelse. One of the funniest moments in the movie is when Ginger Rogers tellsWarner Baxter that Ruby Keeler is the person who should star in the big show– Rogers was incomperably more talented that Keeler at both singing anddancing (it’s almost painful to watch Keeler stomp around staring at herfeet), but she plays the (already at that time) cliche of the good girlgetting a big break charmingly in spite of her many limitations as aperformer. (Just for the record, Rogers wasn’t my favorite musical star;while quite talented, her shortcomings as a dancer were all too evident whendancing with Fred Astaire, but then so were almost everyone’s…)

There are any number of later musicals that parodied this one to goodeffect, but my two favorites are the "Baxter’s Beauties" segment of "Movie,Movie" and "The Band Wagon". The former is a straight parody, so theconnection is easy to see, but I consider the latter a parody, too, in thatin neither this movie nor "The Band Wagon" is it possible to imagine asingle Broadway show having the bizarre collection of musical numbers usedin either movie. I consider this to be one of the funniest running jokes in"The Band Wagon", and while this goofiness is true of all of the BusbyBerkeley musicals I’ve ever seen, I think of this as the definitive one.(However, "Gold Diggers of 1933" is, to my mind, the most spectacularlyinsane of his movies.)

A person like me, who loves musicals, has to have great respect fo
r thismovie, since it’s basically the start of a classic story: the star is sick, someonehas to take her place. It’s clear why they wanted to make a play out of thismovie. Two reasons: One, it’s a classic story about show business, and two, itdefinitely has the potential to be better. The show makes this story more light hearted by

adding more characters and more good humor. The movie is a little morewitty in its script, but little real humor. The show also adds a few more greatsongs, by the same writer. Not that the lack of humor slows down the movie. Theacting is well done, especially Julian Marsh and Peggy Sawyer. The movie’s only real

weak points are its musical numbers. While the songs are great, the

choreography is overdone a little. Busby Berkely, while his work isvisually dazzling, has little imagination. What would the point be of making suchgrand formations that can only be seen overhead, when a Broadway audience can’t

see overhead? Besides, there is little real dancing, like in the play. Theplay’s stunning dances cannot compare to the gingerbread, museum display quality of

Busby Berkely’s work. Really, there is no ‘art,’ in the dances, justsomething to look at. Another problem is that numbers meant to be comic, like ShuffleOff to Buffalo, are done as if they were merely sentimental, which takes away fromthe general ‘risqué’ tone of the song. At least it shows the Depression more

accurately than most films of the period. All in all, the movie is a goodeffort, but might have done just the same if it had been about a dramatic play than a

musical. But then, you have to love this movie, for if it weren’t for it,we would never have had a quality Broadway production come fromit.

I've probably seen this for the 42nd time now - there's something aboutit that still works for me obviously. It became the template andapotheosis of backstage musicals on film, nothing in the same veinthat's followed has added anything.

Broke producer Warner Baxter is desperate to create a successfulBroadway musical show (he hopes his last) from a selection of desperateand disparate hoofers and crooners. With plenty of sub stories it'sfrothingly intense Baxter's film from start to finish, albeit with somewonderful Dubin & Warren songs and excellent sharp studio orchestrawork. To put it charitably I'm afraid I never understood Ruby Keeler'stalent and star billings properly - imho throughout her career sheacted flatly and danced awkwardly; her whole performance here lackedemotion. Maybe only on the stage and screen though.

With 4 beautiful songs - You're Getting To Be A Habit being the best -and knockout routines from Busby Berkeley, especially on Young AndHealthy, and some cute cynical dialogue it's still an engrossinginconsequential 85 minutes after all the years and pastiches.

My only question is this–Why do we have to watch Ruby Keeler dance whenGinger Rogers is standing right there????? Other than that, it’s a greatfilm with truly memorable music. I really enjoyed Bebe Daniels’performance.

I have seen 42nd Street numerous times and never tire of it. Yes, ittakes a long time to get to the big musical numbers, but it's wellworth the wait! The sequence accompanying the strong title song isfabulous, and 'Shuffle off to Buffalo' is excellent, too (even though Istill don't understand everything in the lyrics).

You can't blame the film for its clichéd story — this is the original,folks.

In fact, the story is good and Warner Baxter is great — hammy, yes,but great — as the slave-driving director who is desperate to put on asuccessful show before he drops dead from a mystery illness.

The weird part, as many have noted, is Ruby Keeler. That awful voice.The ungainly dancing. The complete inability to act. Whyever pick herto stand in for Bebe Daniels? As another reviewer has rightly said, anyother woman in the cast would have done a better job. Yet, hopeless asshe is, she somehow contributes to making an enjoyable movie.

It is fabulous entertainment. It makes its era really live, and it'svery sad to realize that all those talented performers, bursting withyouth and life, are now dead and gone.

I was wondering if anyone has any comments on Bebe’s performancein this movie? I may be overstepping posting a comment here as I have nothad the pleasure of seeing this particular movie, but I have seen some ofthe other (Many) films that Bebe Daniels made and I think she waswonderful!Although I may be a little biased since she was a relative of mine!Couldsomeoneplease correspond with me on this subject, and also, how can I find outwhen42nd Street will be airing again? Thank you so much and please excuse thefact that I have not seen this movie. I would love to see it! Thanks!

read comments (0)