I think this pretty much isn't a melodrama. Initially, it was clear that it is a melodrama, till the end where things started to shift. The last 15 minutes of the movie changed my perception towards the entire plot.
Starting of this film, there was much initial indication that melodrama was the main storyline. Shadowy figures indicates expressionism, eerie balloon floating, the ball rolling, leaves the audience in horror and shock towards what might have happened to Elsie. Immediately, we would have known that the child murderer was that man, obvious to the eye. But as soon as the story unfolds further, slowly it didn't seem like a melodrama anymore. The criminals were working like policemen, to look for the child murderer. The policemen however were behaving like scoundrels in their search attempts repeatedly. This made the police look like bad guys and the bad guys look like good guys. That marks the turn of the melodrama, where it really began to look like the opposite of a melodrama movie.
The end part of the movie, where the criminals brought up a court order under the terrain of the city. There held a trial for the murderer, where he was accused of just being a dangerous person to the outside world. But of what real interest is he to the criminals? He could just be the reason for interfering with their shady jobs out there in the world. He is no different than Safecracker, the judge of the 'criminal court', who murdered 3 people as well. Now here's the catch, the criminal starts to break down, after repeatedly saying that he 'can't help what he's doing'. This is undoubtedly an overused statement in the court. But is it true that he really couldn't help what he was doing? I have my doubts towards him just the same as everybody in the criminal courtroom. I would say to myself: execute him immediately, if left to the asylum, he would deem himself cured once again and break out, and start the vicious cycle all over again. But what if it really was true? That the man was, sick?
If there were professional psychiatrists decades ago, he could have been officially diagnosed with mental illness. But all there was to then were just judgments and accusations based on newspapers and hands-on murder evidences. So this man was sick. As his 'lawyer' has said, "a sick man should be handed over to the doctor, not to the executioner" makes enough sense to say that he was mentally ill. But the crowd continues to ignore that defense statement. So, it seems that the murderer had double personalities, or so he claims. Something like Jekyll and Hyde. An inner voice that haunts him to kill. Maybe nobody could lament the feelings and thoughts that tortured this child murderer that drives him to kill children for the sake of silencing that voice in his head, temporarily. It seems as though he is the victim, and the real murderer is the voice in his head. So is the voice to be blamed? Or who is to be condemned guilty here?
In my opinion, I would truly say that this turns out not to be a melodrama at all. Despite all that has happened, I would still say that this man is a victim of himself. He is not a murderer, his other personality is. But there is no punishment for a different personality, which is probably why the movie is left hanging in the air. A women at the end of the movie said, "this would not bring back our children". As though to say executing him to death would bring back their children. Ridiculous is it not?
Which means most probably they sentenced him to the asylum under state protection.
Guilty or not, I think this situation is no stranger to many criminals out there in this world today. It is always better to be safe than sorry, prevention is better than cure. After all people are not perfect.
This is a very good argument for the film's not being a melodrama. You are especially observant of and sensitive to the trial scene, where the film turns the audience around. What's missing is the cinematic and dramatic elements in the scene. For example Peter Lorre's performance, or the way the criminal "court" is photographed. You also miss the very end where the court is silent.
ReplyDelete6.5/8