After years of dreary labor in Hollywood as a professional "evil foreigner," Lorre went home to Germany to write, direct and star in this dark, dreamlike narrative in which he plays the ultimate Peter Lorre character: a Nazi mad doctor sex murderer. The film is an ironic commentary by Lorre, the reluctant impersonator of psychopaths, on the nature of true psychopathology as embodied in the amoral Nazi regime. It's also an ingenious melding of the sort of B-film noir that Lorre had specialized in for years as an actor (Maltese Falcon, Stranger on the Third Floor, Quicksand) and the impressionistic Nouvelle Roman/Nouvelle Vague influenced art film just picking up steam on the continent (shades of Orpheus, Wild Strawberries, and Last Year at Marienbad can be seen in its shadowy enfolding of past/present and dream/reality.) Though somewhat uncertain in balancing himself between his roles as principal actor and director (the motivations of some of the other characters are somewhat murky, for instance, and it's rather a shock to see Peter Lorre so continually being the object of women's lustful attentions) this was clearly a man with the makings of an ingenious and original filmmaker. It's a shame this film isn't better known, and that Lorre never got the chance to make another.
16 Reviews
THE LOST ONE (Peter Lorre, 1951) ***1/2
Bunuel19765 July 2009
Following a period of rehabilitation where he managed to beat his addiction to morphine, character actor extraordinaire Peter Lorre felt confident enough not only to leave his secure employment as a lean, sleek villain in myriad Hollywood noirs and go back to his native Germany after almost 20 years (which, like many compatriots, he had fled when the Nazis came to power) but also to embark on his sole foray behind the camera. Adopting an unfussy technique but a compelling flashback structure, Lorre turned out a truly remarkable piece of work that, equally unsuccessful on its first release as Charles Laughton's THE NIGHT OF THE HUNTER (1955) and Marlon Brando's ONE-EYED JACKS (1961), has yet to have its somewhat maligned reputation vindicated in the same unequivocal manner as these two 'one-hit wonders' by actors-turned-directors. A chubbier, infinitely world-weary Lorre gives a haunting central performance as the dedicated, real-life scientist Dr. Karl Rothe who, being told by his superiors that his discoveries were being passed on to the allied forces by his beautiful (and much younger) fiancée, strangles her in a moment of silent rage upon returning to the lodgings he shares with his mother-on-law and her cat; the actress playing Lorre's first victim (Renate Mannhardt) makes such an indelible impression on the spectator that, upon a second viewing, one is surprised to discover how brief her appearance in the film actually is. Changing his identity and now serving as a medical doctor in a refugee camp, Lorre is brought once again face to face with his inner demons in the shape of his assistant during WWII who, apart from having carried on an affair with Lorre's wife, was secretly also an important Party official investigating the infamous "Night Of The Long Knives" conspiracy (which is rather murkily dealt with in the film's latter stages); another enigmatic aspect of Lorre's personality that is somewhat oddly thrown into the mix is his troubled dealings with other women over the years, culminating in another murder committed in a stationary train carriage. Interestingly, the film opens with a shot of a moving train out of which emerges the tiny figure of Lorre walking towards the refugee camp and ends in a devastating medium shot of Lorre, one hand clasped dejectedly to his face, standing stationary on the railroad tracks as a locomotive rushes headlong in his direction! As one can surmise from this synopsis, THE LOST ONE's lack of critical and commercial success ought to be attributed more to its utter grimness and thoroughly defeatist view of post-war Germany than to any jinx the production might have been vested with (the film's producer, Arnold Pressburger, died in mid-production, the original negative was lost in an editing suite fire and the film survives via a reconstructed print, etc.) and, indeed, should be much better known even among film connoisseurs. Personally, I had first come across a copy of the film at a priceless DVD rental store on Santa Monica Blvd. in Hollywood in January 2006 but I have since added it to my collection in a seemingly restored version (albeit sporting distractingly ungrammatical English subtitles).
A very good film that should have gotten Peter Lorre more jobs directing
dbborroughs30 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Peter Lorre directs for the only time. Beautifully shot and acted this movie is a sad foot note to what might have been had Lorre been allowed to direct more films. Everything on a technical level is fantastic, with Lorre composing some starkly haunting shots, the shots in and around the camp that book ends the film. Here was a man who clearly learned how to put a film together from the masters like Lang and Hitchcock. He paints a wonderful portrait of the war and of its aftermath that is almost tactile.
The problem with the film is that the story spins out of control, like our characters life, in odd unexpected ways, not all of them good. The plot has Lorre, as a doctor in a refuge camp after the second world war, running into an old "friend". It quickly is revealed that there is more to the good doctor than meets the eye and in a flashback that takes up most of the film, we see what happened during the war years. From murder for survival to mass murder its a small jump. The problem is that the trip seems a bit unfocused with a couple of turns seeming to be forced (forgive me for not telling too much since the bumps are late in the film and I don't want to give away plot points).
Despite the bumps the film is definitely worth a look, if for no other reason then to see what Lorre could do in the directors chair.6.5 out of 10, 7 for IMDb purposes.
The problem with the film is that the story spins out of control, like our characters life, in odd unexpected ways, not all of them good. The plot has Lorre, as a doctor in a refuge camp after the second world war, running into an old "friend". It quickly is revealed that there is more to the good doctor than meets the eye and in a flashback that takes up most of the film, we see what happened during the war years. From murder for survival to mass murder its a small jump. The problem is that the trip seems a bit unfocused with a couple of turns seeming to be forced (forgive me for not telling too much since the bumps are late in the film and I don't want to give away plot points).
Despite the bumps the film is definitely worth a look, if for no other reason then to see what Lorre could do in the directors chair.6.5 out of 10, 7 for IMDb purposes.
"...Only I had been restored to life. Inconceivable."
brogmiller25 November 2022
After eighteen years in exile Peter Lorre returned to the land of his birth for his one and only stab at directing. Based upon a newspaper article about a doctor who had killed his assistant and then stepped in front of a train, Lorre has fashioned a screenplay with the help of novelist Benno Vigny and esteemed director Helmut Kautner.
Like so many actors who take up directing he is very generous to his players and in particular allows his five actresses to shine. Individual scenes are extremely effective but these alas are achieved at the expense of overall structure. Despite oodles of atmosphere from superlative lighting cameraman Vaclav Vich, the film is weakened by a verbose script and an intrusive, over-orchestrated score. Suffice to say Lorre is riveting as Dr. Rothe but the entire enterprise required a firmer hand at the helm.
This is a film that Lorre evidently felt compelled to make but this bleak allegory of Germany's fatal flirtation with National Socialism and the nation's collective guilt in the person of a serial murderer was hardly likey to be welcomed by audiences of the time and such proved to be case.
That it has a haunting quality is undeniable and remains, in the words of David Thomson, "a direct imprint of a very troubled soul."
Like so many actors who take up directing he is very generous to his players and in particular allows his five actresses to shine. Individual scenes are extremely effective but these alas are achieved at the expense of overall structure. Despite oodles of atmosphere from superlative lighting cameraman Vaclav Vich, the film is weakened by a verbose script and an intrusive, over-orchestrated score. Suffice to say Lorre is riveting as Dr. Rothe but the entire enterprise required a firmer hand at the helm.
This is a film that Lorre evidently felt compelled to make but this bleak allegory of Germany's fatal flirtation with National Socialism and the nation's collective guilt in the person of a serial murderer was hardly likey to be welcomed by audiences of the time and such proved to be case.
That it has a haunting quality is undeniable and remains, in the words of David Thomson, "a direct imprint of a very troubled soul."
so heavy
blanche-26 December 2021
So heavy and so depressing, as any post-World War II German film - with flashbacks - would be.
Peter Lorre, in real life addicted to morphine, came out of rehab and returned to Germany, where he directed and starred in a film, The Lost Man, in 1951.
Lorre is a scientist, Dr. Karl Rothe, who after the war was presumed dead and therefore was able to change his name to Neumeister. During the Nazi era, he learns from those over him that his discoveries are being sold to the enemy - by his fiancee.
In a rage, he strangles her. Now he works as a doctor in a refugee camp, but is reminded of his past in the presence of the man who was his assistant during the war, Hosch, who was involved in the investigation of The Night of the Long Knives.
The "Night Of The Long Knives" was a series of political extrajudicial executions intended to consolidate Hitler's power and alleviate the concerns of the German military about the role of Ernst Röhm and the Sturmabteilung (SA), the Nazis' paramilitary organization, known colloquially as "Brownshirts."conspiracy.
That Neumeister has become completely unstable is demonstrated not only in his narration of the flashback, in which he tells Hosch that he intended to kill him, but in his problems with women. At one point, he murders a woman while on a train.
Lorre did a magnificent job in both his acting and direction. The end of the film is just as miserable as the rest of it. It's powerful, but don't have any sharp objects in the house.
Peter Lorre, in real life addicted to morphine, came out of rehab and returned to Germany, where he directed and starred in a film, The Lost Man, in 1951.
Lorre is a scientist, Dr. Karl Rothe, who after the war was presumed dead and therefore was able to change his name to Neumeister. During the Nazi era, he learns from those over him that his discoveries are being sold to the enemy - by his fiancee.
In a rage, he strangles her. Now he works as a doctor in a refugee camp, but is reminded of his past in the presence of the man who was his assistant during the war, Hosch, who was involved in the investigation of The Night of the Long Knives.
The "Night Of The Long Knives" was a series of political extrajudicial executions intended to consolidate Hitler's power and alleviate the concerns of the German military about the role of Ernst Röhm and the Sturmabteilung (SA), the Nazis' paramilitary organization, known colloquially as "Brownshirts."conspiracy.
That Neumeister has become completely unstable is demonstrated not only in his narration of the flashback, in which he tells Hosch that he intended to kill him, but in his problems with women. At one point, he murders a woman while on a train.
Lorre did a magnificent job in both his acting and direction. The end of the film is just as miserable as the rest of it. It's powerful, but don't have any sharp objects in the house.
probably very confusing to people who don't speak German
sstocker17 October 2002
This is probably a good movie, but it's hard to tell because at many key moments throughout the movie it is difficult to read the subtitles. Because the movie is in black and white, white subtitles keep showing up on white background and so, unless you understand German, you only catch snatches of important conversations. This is particularly a problem in the last fifth of the movie that involves a scene in a large house where a plot to kill Hitler is being hatched (I think). What that had to do with Dr. Rothe (the Peter Lorre character) killing his fiancee and his subsequent choice about which Nazi to shoot I have yet to figure out. After the movie, I asked total strangers in the audience what was going on in that house and they didn't know either.
I suggest that any distributor who is looking to make some money from this movie should consider producing a new edition with yellow subtitles that will stand out on both black and white backgrounds. Without those, this will remain a movie that is well-known only in Germany.
I suggest that any distributor who is looking to make some money from this movie should consider producing a new edition with yellow subtitles that will stand out on both black and white backgrounds. Without those, this will remain a movie that is well-known only in Germany.
Not quite a masterpiece
allenrogerj22 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
A well-made, intelligent film with big faults. First the virtues: Peter Lorre acts very well as the disillusioned drunken doctor in a refugee camp and the other actors all do their jobs well; the camera-work is very good- the picture of a desolate camp in the middle of nowhere and the surrounding country, the solid bourgeois apartment where Lorre's character lives and a city under attack are all superbly portrayed. The film's themes- the relationship between mass murder and individual murder, the distance between what people seem and what they are, solitude and society- are interesting in themselves, even if they crowd one another out in the film. However the film has some pretty big flaws. The first is Lorre himself; in the standard Lorre role he is good, as i said, but as the dedicated research doctor capable of inspiring desire in women he is completely unconvincing. It's interesting that Lorre and Karl John were born about a year apart; John is completely convincing as the young opportunist and as the slightly older desperate opportunist, but Lorre always seems twenty years older in body and a thousand years older in soul. We can't believe that Lorre ever felt strongly enough to kill the women, whereas we are persuaded by his contempt and hatred for John in those parts of the film set after the war. Equally, we cannot believe that any of the women were ever attracted to Lorre in the first place. These are big faults, but it's a sign of the film's qualities that they don't overwhelm it and nor does the intrusive music. The other faults of the film are faults of over-ambition and a desire to do things film can't do; faults so rare that we needn't worry too much about their frequency. The greatest regret is that Lorre couldn't make more films and learn from his mistakes and build up his successes: it would certainly have been a better fate than doing Peter Lorre impersonations to earn a living as he had to.
An extraordinary masterpiece, an adequate film for this context.
vferenz7 May 2001
Der Verlorene is an extraordinary film noir not only as text but also in its context. This film disappeared after only ten days from german screens although most critics said that it´s the best german film after WW II. The reasons are very simple: First, it was too late. This film five years earlier in 1946 would have been the Trümmerfilm par excellance. Compare it to Die Mörder sind unter uns and you will see the huge difference. Second, in the upcoming era of Wirtschaftswunder no one in whole Western Germany wanted a reminder on what their industry and morality was build on: the Third Reich. Consider this, when Marlene Dietrich came back to Germany many people shouted: Go home! In the 1950s one producer said about Fritz Kortner: Hitler could have burnt more Jews. This way of thinking wasn´t elimated and still it´s not. Nowadays WW II is good for action flics (Saving Private Ryan and all this crap) or love stories (for example this desaster Enemy at the Gates). It´s depressing but one shouldn´t get mad over it. Just see Der Verlorene and you will see there were people how to handle this topic in an adequate manner. Maybe there are some filmmakers out there who still know. Let´s hope for it.
One of the greatest post war german films!
pyamada15 April 2002
Lorre, perhaps like Charles Laughton, had only this chance to direct. Like Laughton, Lorre made an excellent film, and encountered no problems whatsoever concerning complete control of the film, unlike Laughton, whose film was given a crude ending as a gift from the studio. This is a beautiful, poetic movie about horrible subjects, and the complicated reactions and perspectives one will have about these characters, especially Lorre's, teaches us much about Germany, the Nazis and aspects of the war in general. While there are passing similarities in content to Wilder's A Foreign Affair, Die Verlorne is so much the better movie, so much more poetic (perhaps than anything Wilder ever did), and so moving, in brutal ways, that it just has to be considered one of the best and most powerful and most depressing films ever made.
You never get rid of the past, no matter how you try to forget it
clanciai28 March 2022
This unique German noir is a weird film, to say the least. A doctor at a vaccination clinic makes an interruption in his work, when another doctor comes there to assist him, who is a dark shadow out of his past. During the war he was a researcher achieving great findings and results, and that suddenly appearing man was his assistant, stealing his research results and selling them to the enemy, using his betrothed for a bait, so he stole both his work and his fiancée. Peter Lorre is the doctor who can't forgive his betrothed for her treason, so he strangles her in the most sensitive scene of the film (without showing the strangulation - it is only reported afterwards,) and from that moment on he is a lost man. All this is shown in flashbacks, as Lorre has a long talk with his old colleague while drinking and smoking, sorting things out, to reach a settlement. The film and the story is complicated, the flashbacks are confusing, the story involves both Nazi plots, bombings of Hamburg, another improvised murder, proving the liability of the psychopath Peter Lorre has grown into, and everything is draped in very dark shadows and abysmal moods, the character of the film is apocalyptic, and shadows play an important part in the cinematography. It is fascinating and weird, deeply disturbing and melancholy at the same time, poignantly pinpointing the mood of post war Germany among the ruins of both Hamburg and people, in a world where no one can feel at home or safe or any security any more.
This movie is a mess but a fairly interesting one
manuel-pestalozzi27 June 2005
Somehow Peter Lorre wanted to make a comeback in post war Germany with this movie. He plays the principal role in Der Verlorene, a little guy stumbling through the Nazi years in Germany and ending up just wanting to put an end to his life (apparently based on a true story). He also directed and participated in the screen writing. And that was probably too much. The movie is ill paced and takes several unexpected turns which break down the narrative rhythm. The movie also seems to shift in an uneasy way into different genres. It starts out as a solid firm noir with a flashback, a love story, betrayal and a murder. Then Lorre reverts to his role in Fritz Lang's M and becomes a psychotic woman hater and mass murderer. Then, back in the noir mode, he stumbles inadvertently into the preparation for the assassination of Hitler (a real event that took place in 1944) and, believe it or not, the movie definitely becomes a kind of a black comedy. The main character ends up a tragic clown who can not be taken seriously (and I am pretty sure it was not meant that way). Some plot details are plainly ludicrous and do not work. An example: Lorre's character takes to strangling women who try to "make him hot". They are decidedly bigger and larger than he is and all look as if they would put up fierce resistance against a strangling Lorre, probably easily overpowering him. But they react like frightened lambs I just had to laugh at that, or was I missing a crucial symbolic twist here? However, other aspects of the movie are interesting. The theme of betrayal and double cross are cleverly presented as the essence of every day life in Nazi Germany. The set design and the scenes shot on location somewhere in Germany create an oppressive atmosphere with darkened parlours, basement laboratories, bleak apartments and landscapes of ruins and emergency shelters. Actually, all the elements that make a good movie are there and in itself well presented: some good dialogue, the observation, the surprise moments, the suspense and even a car chase. There are some very good female parts. The game of flirting and sexual innuendo is presented in a frankness that was pretty drastic for the period, I guess. But these elements stand by themselves and unfortunately don't come together to form a good movie. Robert Siodmak's thematically related movie Nachts, wenn der Teufel kam was a much more convincing comeback with a film that transports American noir mode to Nazi Germany.
A film to dream about it.
marcusfernandes6 July 2009
DER VERLORENE is one of these films that at first seemed to me very confusing and brought me the sensation "i am not following...".I rated it 8 out of 10 mainly because of the wonderful film-noir atmosphere,the black and white photograph,the very well filmed scenes on the streets of "old" Hamburg and ,above all,the extraordinary last minutes.
Then,time passed and months later ,i still have that strange feeling in my mind ,i have been dreaming with that loneness and absurd madness of the main character-the doctor played by Peter Lorre.So i decided to include DER VERLORENE amongst my personal list of best films ever and change my vote to 10 out of 10.
Sometimes a good work of art takes its necessary time to mature as a good wine!.In my humble opinion that is the case of this film.
Then,time passed and months later ,i still have that strange feeling in my mind ,i have been dreaming with that loneness and absurd madness of the main character-the doctor played by Peter Lorre.So i decided to include DER VERLORENE amongst my personal list of best films ever and change my vote to 10 out of 10.
Sometimes a good work of art takes its necessary time to mature as a good wine!.In my humble opinion that is the case of this film.
Lost in Transit
hasosch1 February 2009
Warning: Spoilers
One would believe that the end of World War II means release for Dr. Karl Rothe (Peter Lorre). Under the Nazi regime he used to be a serologist. His fiancée Inge (Renate Mannhardt) spied on his scientific results and told them to the government. When Rothe found out, he killed her in affect. However, the Nazis protected him, because he was very useful. His assistant Hösch (Karl John) covers him after investigations have been started and saves him from the gallows. But Rothe is slowly eaten up by his feelings of guilt. So, for him personally, the end of the war does not mean much. He changes his name in Dr. Neumeister and finds work in a camp for emigrants. He drinks heavily. Soon, an assistant is assigned to him, a certain Nowack which turns out to be Neumeister's former collaborator Hösch. Neumeister is very wrong in assuming that he has finally found the right person to talk over his difficult psychological situation. Nowack has no feelings of guilt and no understanding at all for Neumeister. In a moment of affect, Neumeister kills Nowack and leaves the camp.
Many reviewers have found that "Der Verlorene"/"The Lost One" (1951), the only film that Peter Lorre directed, is a masterpiece in the legion of movies about World War II. The movie is very special since he does not only show the bombed cities, but also the ruined souls. Lorre-biographer Stephen D. Youngkin has even seen strong autobiographic traces in Lorre's life. It seems as if the way from Dr. Rothe to Dr. Neumeister is a series of transits: First the transit of the war (there will be an end, but when?). Second, the transit of post-war: The allies control Germany (there will be an end with searching for Nazi criminals, but when?). And third, the isolation of someone who is incapable of excusing his own deed, although it was committed during the Nazi time and therefore under circumstances that others use as excuses. Therefore, for Dr. Neumeister, there is no light at the end of the transit-corridor of his life. Nevertheless, he prefers meeting a train-engine al fresco instead of killing himself with the same weapon by which he killed Nowack in the camp some half hour ago. When we see, at the end of the film, Lorre-Neumeister walking slowly towards the approaching train, even throwing his cigarette away at the right moment, we must realize that it is impossible to emigrate from ourselves.
Many reviewers have found that "Der Verlorene"/"The Lost One" (1951), the only film that Peter Lorre directed, is a masterpiece in the legion of movies about World War II. The movie is very special since he does not only show the bombed cities, but also the ruined souls. Lorre-biographer Stephen D. Youngkin has even seen strong autobiographic traces in Lorre's life. It seems as if the way from Dr. Rothe to Dr. Neumeister is a series of transits: First the transit of the war (there will be an end, but when?). Second, the transit of post-war: The allies control Germany (there will be an end with searching for Nazi criminals, but when?). And third, the isolation of someone who is incapable of excusing his own deed, although it was committed during the Nazi time and therefore under circumstances that others use as excuses. Therefore, for Dr. Neumeister, there is no light at the end of the transit-corridor of his life. Nevertheless, he prefers meeting a train-engine al fresco instead of killing himself with the same weapon by which he killed Nowack in the camp some half hour ago. When we see, at the end of the film, Lorre-Neumeister walking slowly towards the approaching train, even throwing his cigarette away at the right moment, we must realize that it is impossible to emigrate from ourselves.
Coming to terms with World War II
Horst_In_Translation5 May 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This 100 minute movie from almost 65 years ago is mostly known for one fact: It is the only movie from Peter Lorre as director and writer. He is the only director here, but got help from a trio of other writers. And he plays the lead part as well. The character fits Lorre very nicely again. His history of playing characters who fight their inner demons turned him into one of the most famous actors of his generation ("M"). And his reputation has probably even risen with time. It is a black-and-white movie, which is not a given for 1951. Lorre looks like a mix of Peter Falk and Bruno Ganz here. The rest of the cast is not known. Or I should probably say not known anymore, unless you have a really deep interest in German movies in the 1930, 1940s and 1950s.
This film was made shortly after the division of Germany into East and West. There are constant references on murder and suicide in this film, but it's all fairly difficult to understand. You can never be sure if Lorre plays a cold-blooded killer or just a victim of unlucky circumstances as the camera frequently blends out in the most crucial moments. The only real killing we see is the one near the end involving Lorre's assistant who he tells the story to. I personally felt this film becomes more and more difficult to understand the longer it goes. So, after the one-hour-mark, the entire action and plot was basically completely blurry to me. It is probably easier to understand if you read the summary before watching this movie, but this cannot be a requirement to understand and enjoy this movie. Also, the plot mentioned here about betraying secrets was totally non-existent for me, probably just a minor part. Forgettable movie. Not recommended.
This film was made shortly after the division of Germany into East and West. There are constant references on murder and suicide in this film, but it's all fairly difficult to understand. You can never be sure if Lorre plays a cold-blooded killer or just a victim of unlucky circumstances as the camera frequently blends out in the most crucial moments. The only real killing we see is the one near the end involving Lorre's assistant who he tells the story to. I personally felt this film becomes more and more difficult to understand the longer it goes. So, after the one-hour-mark, the entire action and plot was basically completely blurry to me. It is probably easier to understand if you read the summary before watching this movie, but this cannot be a requirement to understand and enjoy this movie. Also, the plot mentioned here about betraying secrets was totally non-existent for me, probably just a minor part. Forgettable movie. Not recommended.
Disappointing film with a few effective sequences
gridoon20249 May 2023
When an actor steps behind the camera, there is a built-in curiosity value to his venture, epsecially when a) he's a famous actor and b) he only ever made one such attempt. Sadly, "The Lost One" is not the buried treasure one might hope it would be. As a director, Peter Lorre doesn't do much that's cinematically inventive, and what's worse, he doesn't make much of the proceedings clear enough. And as an actor, he underplays to perhaps an excessive degree. With that said, this film does contain a couple of effective sequences, most notably a murder set in a train, and the final shot. ** out of 4.
Bored
mrdonleone17 July 2022
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
