M Blu-ray Movie

Rating summary

Movie		4.5
Video		4.5
Audio		4.5
Extras		4.0
Overall		4.5

M Blu-ray Movie Review

Recently acquired French materials lead to yet another tempting release of 'M'

Reviewed by Kenneth Brown September 13, 2011

This review will focus solely on the technical aspects of the 2011 TLEFilms restoration and subsequent Universum Film Blu-ray release of M. For a review of the film, see Dr. Svet Atanasov's coverage of the 2010 Criterion and 2010 Eureka Entertainment releases. The only thing I feel compelled to add is this: I remain astonished -- each and every time I revisit Fritz Lang's classic -- at just how ahead of its time M really was. But I digress. In July, I had the unique opportunity to interview restoration supervisor Torsten Kaiser of TLEFilms; an interview that blossomed into a fascinating three-hour discussion about film preservation, the challenges faced by modern preservationists, and the strides made in the most recent restoration of M. What follows, at least initially, are select excerpts from that interview that pertain to Universum Film's excellent 2-disc DigiBook release.

Ken Brown: What are the differences between the 2010 Criterion release of M and the 2011 Universum edition?

Torsten Kaiser: M is completely different and not. (Laughs) We had a choice at the beginning when we started to rework M. We laid our eyes on the materials and the fine grain that was crafted in 2000 and 2001 [that I was talking about earlier]. You have to understand, only 70% of the camera negative survived in a way that it was really useful. In total, some 80% survived, but 10% wasn't usable because of perforation damage, large tears, incredible instabilities, water damage and all sorts of other things. The other 30% where the OCN, the original camera negative is missing presumed lost due to damage is made up of five different materials, all of them print materials. It's important to note that this is all nitrate-based material. Nitrate prints have a different kind of quality than safety material. Nitrate prints, if developed properly, can register wonderfully. However, in terms of gradation and density, they're much more contrast-y than the negative. The negative survived pretty well, but only up to certain points. In some shots, the negative becomes scratchy or shakes violently. M was affected by all of that and more, including missing, damaged and unusable shots and frames.

Imagine that you have an element which is like a puzzle; a giant puzzle. In order to complete that puzzle, every piece of that puzzle has to match. Every piece has to fit.. Now imagine that due to a chemical and time processes, some of the puzzle pieces have enlarged, some have widened and some have shrunk. Each variance makes it that much more difficult to fit the whole thing together perfectly, right? That's exactly what happened with M. The physical 35mm materials (and subsequently the transfers created from it, including the Criterion transfer) exhibited that shaking, as well as noticeable variances between shots in gamma, gradation and density as often different 35mm generation materials would have to be chosen in a single shot in order to complete it. This is exactly what the 35mm element looks like. This is exactly what the fine grain looks like. And so, with regards to the 2011 Universum transfer, we had a choice, budget and work wise. We knew when we looked at the different pieces of the puzzle that it was going to be very, very complicated. We would have a few frames of the film from one source and 5 feet of film from another; 10 feet from the next source and ninety feet from yet another; three frames off this source, four frames from that source, seven frames from another source and 1,237 feet from the camera negative source. It would be that diverse.

KB: It sounds incredibly daunting.

TK: In order to make this new photo-chemical preservation, we had to preserve these separate elements while creating one unified element. It was a hell of a job – a long job – and we knew that we could go back to the original materials, to the original camera negative. But we also had to ask ourselves if we would gain enough additional information to improve the image, knowing that the budget for the project would reach high six-figure sums. We're talking about more than $600,000 dollars here. We decided it would not be possible. We knew the owner would not put up the money for it and, therefore, it would not be worthwhile. And in order to get the element stabilized, scanning was out of the question because you would have to scan bits and pieces of two and three frames apiece, and that would be murderous work. Even then, you would end up with print materials that had to be skewed photo-chemically anyway. A scan would not have dealt with these kinds of elements in the proper way that was needed. And the photo-chemical base can help you balance things out more than the digital process in some cases, especially when you're dealing with camera negative and print materials, and especially when it comes to blown-out whites or huge separations on a negative.

KB: I'm assuming quality control was essential on M.

TK: Definitely. When working on the 2011 restoration of M that eventually came out on Blu-ray through Universum Film, we very early came to the conclusion that there was no way to justify the cost of completely going though the entire excruciating photochemical minting process all over again as it by comparison would change rather little in terms of quality. Therefore, using the fine grain element made for preservation by the team around Martin Koerber in 2000 and 2001 as a main basis was the correct choice in more ways than just the one. We had way more enough to do on this element to begin with without adding the extra hassle of re-minting the "not really fitting" small bits and pieces of the giant nitrate puzzle to it. The work had already been done. There was no way to justify the costs for the means. Again, you have to understand the pieces of the M puzzle came from different origins, had been moved in different ways, had shrunk and widened in different ways, and decomposed in different ways over the years. It was easy to see they fit together once, but one print would be a little bit darker, or the gamma in one corner would be a little bit different and so on and so forth. And there were so many, many, many, many, many pieces that had to be fit and re-fit on the photo-chemical level. The gentlemen in Bologna, Italy working on the nitrate materials in order to "render" the 35mm preservation fine grain had already done the very best they could in the photochemical realm over two years. We knew we could certainly do the work again, but we also knew it would not significantly improve the Blu-ray edition, especially considering the resolution of a Blu-ray master.

The difference, then, between the 2010 Criterion Blu-ray and the 2011 Universum Blu-ray is in the preservation. We found original material from the French version of M, and the French gave us access to it. They were very friendly – worked with us very, very well – and we were able to check the material shot for shot, comparing it not only to the French segments, but also to the original. We also discovered that a lot of sequences and shots were more complete on the 35mm nitrate fine-grain which was preserved on a duplicate negative, now in France on the safety material. And once we knew that, the whole thing became a completely different ballgame because we could piece everything together on the photo-chemical side with a much higher degree of accuracy. In the scene featuring the dog at the pond, the Criterion edition exhibits a sudden jump cut. In several shots surrounding the police raid, there are several missing frames; shots which are interrupted or incomplete because the beginning of the reel was missing on the preservation material. We were able to restore all of those bits on the 2011 Universum transfer.

The Criterion and Universum Film color timing is different as well, and the 2011 color timing is spot on. Obviously, Lee and I were unable to do that on the 2010 Criterion edition. Here, though, we could do it. We literally worked shot by shot, frame by frame. Like the audio, we got visual detail out of the material that, in some cases, we couldn't believe. It was really, really wonderful. It was always in there, but bringing it out is still a wonderful feeling.

KB: What else were you able to accomplish?

TK: One of the most important things we achieved was far greater stabilization. For the very first time, the image has been stabilized in all of the shots that were filmed with a fixed camera position. Due to perforation damage and copying errors a majority of the shots in the film were affected. These fixed-camera position scenes are now restored to or very close the original intention and release. We did retain some accidental instabilities, though. For instance, there's a particular shot where someone bumped the camera – perhaps with a foot or a knee – and the camera rumbles a little. We left that instability as it is because it is precisely what happened on set during filming. However, we stabilized the shots which were affected by perforation damage. There are close to 500 shots in M and we stabilized approximately 280 of them. As a result, the 2011 Universum image is way, way, way more stable. Moreover, the colorist and I worked on this project for almost seven months and the entire image has been color-corrected with proper retiming and stabilization. He commented, "this is a completely different picture. I've noticed things I haven't seen before because the eye simply can't concentrate on things when the image is shaking all the time."

We did other important things as well, and the improvements we achieved were done over the course of several stages. Number one definitely being BASELIGHT, the DI color correction console. Number two: we worked a lot with PFClean. We worked with Furnace too, but while checking everything frame by frame. This was very important because all the frame elements that were badly scratched required the use of an analytical tool. We did not use the automatic side of the Furnace tools at any point, though. We simply used its analytical processing power and then repainted, frame by frame, with Combustion. We also eliminated any artifacts that appeared, going back and forth, back and forth – A-B, A-B, A-B – painting areas affected by artifacts, returning the image to its intended state. This is how things should be done, at least in my view.

KB: Has the audio been improved?

TK: Another major difference between the Criterion and Universum releases is in regards to the audio. There is a very distinct noise floor in M which can really get to your ears after a while, as it's very, very noisy. On the Criterion edition, that audio noise has been reduced. Unfortunately, in getting rid of the noise, they also got rid of a lot of detail in the upper frequencies – in the top frequencies, from 1kHz and above – and they scraped a lot of detail from the lower bandwidth as well. It was quite indiscriminatory. For the 2011 Restoration, we went back to the 2000/2001 preservation sound element – which is based on the complete sound negative and copied to a positive in order to retain proper demodulation. In 2000, a guy named Martin Sawyer did a tremendous job copying things to a positive. The problem was that he couldn't possibly do anything about the moisture and intense dust, debris, scratches and everything that had come into the negative element over the years. He couldn't prevent any of that, and the material could not be washed with an ultrasonic shower. It was a blank element where the sound had been glued on – literally glued on – and there was no way he could have treated it like a normal film element and put it in a washing machine…

KB: (Laughs)

TK: No, it's really called a washing machine!

KB: Sorry, showing my own ignorance.

TK: (Laughs) Well, eventually, what he did was carefully copy it to a positive, at the cost of extreme noise. You don't hear it on the Criterion edition, but you certainly hear it in the new Universum edition as we included both Martin Sawyer's preservation track from 2000 and our new 2011 restoration track where we reduced but did not eliminate the noise, all in an effort to keep the entire bandwidth intact. We pre-mixed it in such a way that we found things, details, that you wouldn't believe. On the 2011 restoration track, you can hear someone lighting a match. You can barely hear it on the preservation track. You can also hear sound cuts in the restoration track – a sound cut near the end where the material had been glued on. After the match is lit, Fritz Lang wanted the rest of the sequence to be silent. Dead silent. How do we know this? Because the film – the sound element – doesn't contain anything except blank film material. There's no glue, no trace of glue… nothing. Nothing fell off, it was just never there. And we know from Fritz Lang interviews and from his instructions to the lab that sequences are supposed to be 100% silent. On the previous positive and previous prints, there was always some kind of sound. There was no sound per se, but because of scratches, moisture and wear and tear there was always an optical sound head. It's typical from old analog film. It was heard at the time, but it was not supposed to be heard, regardless of whether it came during a sound or a silent sequence. But Lang's intention was very, very clear. There were sound sequences and then there were silent sequences, and the silent sequences have been, for the first time since 1931, reinstated in the 2011 Universum Film edition.

KB: Is this, then, as good as M will ever look or sound?

TK: In terms of what could be accomplished for this Blu-ray edition by way of Blu-ray resolution, the answer is yes. It really comes down to budget and timetable. Is there any serious information we could have gained? Anything you could really see on Blu-ray? Anything you could really point your finger to and say, "my God! This is such a revelation!" The answer to all three questions is no, despite budget and everything. There is a huge difference between budgeting for something and seeing any gain coming out of it. I can put up a huge budget for something, but that doesn't necessarily mean you would gain anything from doing so. Questions arise in the case of M. Had we taken all the steps over again, would the image on the new 35mm be any better? The answer is no. Would the answer be any different in regards to Blu-ray registration? The answer is, not really. No. If we had scanned the whole thing to get it to 35mm? No. The ends do not justify the means. It would have been ludicrous to spend all that money on something, and spend two years coming to nearly the same quality level; a level people would have to view with a looking glass to really determine whether or not it was better. Perhaps if we ever have the ability to do it on a different budget – when technology has improved in terms of cost – we could do it all at a different scale. But, again, since we have bits and pieces rather than a continuous reel, so to speak, it would be a huge undertaking.

M Blu-ray Movie, Video Quality 

A more pertinent question would be: is TLEFilms restoration and subsequent 1080p/AVC-encoded video transfer as good as or better than the previously released Criterion and Eureka Entertainment releases of M, both of which have rightfully earned high marks? The answer? In my humble opinion, the Universum Film edition and TLEFilms presentation nudges past each one. Clarity is excellent, contrast is filmic and faithful, and a veneer of easy-on-the-eyes grain mingles with Fritz Arno Wagner's photography without any notable mishaps to speak of. Better still, fine detail is well-resolved and edges are clean and satisfying. (I didn't detect any egregious edge enhancement, although some arguably negligible ringing creeps in from time to time.) Noise reduction isn't a factor either and what little digital manipulation is present has been so judiciously applied (with frame by frame oversight by the preservation team, no less) that it doesn't taint the quality of the presentation. Vertical lines and imperfections appear throughout the picture, but great care has been taken in preserving aspects of the image inherent to the original materials and eliminating those related to print damage and other less savory degradation. Midrange grays look beautiful, black levels are deep and consistent, and I strongly suspect M, currently celebrating its eightieth birthday, couldn't look much better than it does here. Moreover, significant artifacting, banding, aliasing, smearing and other digital eyesores are nowhere to be found, and the TLEFilms restoration is every bit as impressive as Mr. Kaiser conveyed over the course of our interview.

Personal preference is king, though, and there will no doubt be those who prefer the 2010 Criterion presentation (which is a hair sharper) or the brighter, "silvery" Eureka Entertainment transfer. If I were cracking my wallet, the region-free Universum Film release would top my list, followed closely by the Criterion edition (if only for its extensive, English-language extras). Currently, all three editions are sitting on my shelf, and that isn't about to change any time soon. Rather than languishing in picking and choosing, take the opportunity to familiarize yourself with M, appreciate its ever-evolving restoration courtesy of various studios and treat yourself to one of Fritz Lang's finest.

M Blu-ray Movie, Audio Quality 

The Universum Film release offers two lossless options: a German DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 (Mono) preservation track circa 2001 and a German DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 (Mono) restoration track circa 2011. As far as technical quality is concerned, both mixes are terrific. That said, the new track will thrill purists longing to hear every last detail in Lang's soundscape. (The whisper-quiet match strikes Mr. Kaiser mentioned? Revived. The intended silences he mentioned? Restored. The sound effects once lost in time? Resurrected.) An inherited noise floor creates a low-level hiss of sorts, but it shouldn't be mistaken for a production issue, nor is it very intrusive, at least not for those who are prepared for it. Dialogue is intelligible and, barring some presumably unavoidable inconsistencies, clean and clear. Switching between the tracks, the various improvements are readily apparent. Once again, though, personal preference will lead listeners in separate directions. In that regard, the inclusion of both tracks is a bonus sure to please filmfans and audiophiles of all stripes.

M Blu-ray Movie, Special Features and Extras 

The only potential downside to Universum Film's handsome 2-disc DigiBook (at least for English-speaking buyers) is twofold: one, many of M's extras don't offer English audio tracks or subtitles and, two, the set's second disc is a standard DVD, meaning the vast majority of the supplements are presented in standard definition. Fortunately, Universum's 60-page DigiBook -- a breathtaking example of how the DigiBook format should be handled -- is teeming with self-explanatory production sketches, photographs and original press materials everyone can enjoy, regardless of their language. For those who do speak German, more than six hours of special features are included:

• Audio Commentary: With Professor Elisabeth Lenk, author of "Peter Kürten: genannt der Vampir von Düsseldorf," and Dr. Regina Stürickow, author of "Der Kommissar vom Alexanderplatz," moderated by restoration supervisor Torsten Kaiser. The commentary does not feature English subtitles.
• The Hunt for M (SD, 68 minutes): The first part of the set's two-part documentary -- "The Hunt for M," a look at the actual criminal case that inspired Lang's M and the history of the film's release -- is narrated in English with optional German and English subtitles.
• The Hunt for the FilM Elements (SD, 27 minutes): Part two, "The Hunt for the FilM Elements," turns its attention to the loss and discovery of the elements used in previous restorations of the film. It too is narrated in English with optional German and English subtitles.
• M Around the World in Eighty Years (SD, 50 minutes): A chronological comparison of several versions of the film -- the original 1931 release, the 1932 British release, the 1960 re-issue, the 1995 reconstruction, the 2001 preservation and the 2011 80th Anniversary restoration -- with optional German-language commentary featuring Kaiser and 2001 preservation supervisor Martin Koerber.
• 1968 Interview with Fritz Lang (SD, 44 minutes): Naturally, in German. Sadly, without English subtitles.
• 2011 Restoration TLEFilms Featurette (SD, 12 minutes): An all-too-brief glimpse at the 2011 restoration, minus English subtitles.
• Image Gallery (SD): Production sketches, photos and press materials.
• 1960 Re-Issue Theatrical Trailer (HD, 3 minutes)
• DVD-ROM Content (SD)

M Blu-ray Movie, Overall Score and Recommendation 

TLEFilms delivers a meticulous restoration and Universum Film delivers an enticing release. Yes, English speakers will be disappointed with the abundance of German-language special features, but importers should be well acquainted with settling for less when it comes to supplemental packages. Thankfully, TLEFilm's video transfer is precise, polished and proficient, and the disc's dual DTS-HD Master Audio tracks top off an already impressive AV presentation. If you already own the 2010 Criterion edition of M, the 2011 TLEFilms restoration and Universum Film release will be icing on the cake. If you don't, there's no time (or restoration) like the present.