PUBLIC ENEMY, SCARFACE and LITTLE CAESAR are the ones we all know but this one should definitely be on that same shelf. If you like 'the big three' you're bound to like this as well. Is it as good? Not quite but still a must see for any old gangster fans.
This was so obviously made in America in 1931 which was not a happy place. Filmmaker Rowland Brown was very much part of that seedy and dangerous world and it was his mission to show everyone the reality of how he saw life. His film is therefore quite pessimistic - it offers no answer or way out of the escalating problem of crime and corruption which to so many people back then seemed unstoppable. In one scene someone says that in twenty years time, America will no longer be a democracy but a land ruled by gangsters,hoodlums and petty warlords. This film is about that society so there's not many smiles per minute!
Although a very talented writer - his DOORWAY TO HELL really was one of the very best of the early thirties gangster pictures (better than LITTLE CAESAR) but as a director he was more an enthusiastic amateur than a filmmaker. This film is packed with so much story that it doesn't quite allow enough time to develop the characters. As is often the case with first movies, he possibly tries to squeeze too many ideas into his seventy minutes? This is the first film he directed and it unfortunately shows. He doesn't quite manage to make his actors into real people. Marguerite Churchill, for example, one of the most beautiful actresses ever to grace the screen is completely wasted in this - she only has about ten lines. Her role is just decoration. And "For the ladies" there's George Raft - again we don't get to know him.
The big, big, big difference between this and the thirties' best gangster movie, PUBLIC ENEMY is that William Wellman's film was about a person you could relate to. It had focus. Cagney's character wasn't exactly likeable but you felt you knew enough about him to want to know more. You could understand why he was the way he was. Spencer Tracy doesn't feel like someone you'd want to know - he's thoroughly unpleasant.
In summary, this is a well-made film, it's watchable, interesting and entertaining but to be critical, it does lack emotional engagement. Like Brown's (excellent) DOORWAY TO HELL (and also SCARFACE), this invests most of its effort into reflecting early thirties society than telling us about the characters and what makes them tick. As a time machine it's brilliant in transporting you, body and soul to the grimy, gritty and dangerous streets of 1931. If you want a sense of that era, this is perfect.
This was so obviously made in America in 1931 which was not a happy place. Filmmaker Rowland Brown was very much part of that seedy and dangerous world and it was his mission to show everyone the reality of how he saw life. His film is therefore quite pessimistic - it offers no answer or way out of the escalating problem of crime and corruption which to so many people back then seemed unstoppable. In one scene someone says that in twenty years time, America will no longer be a democracy but a land ruled by gangsters,hoodlums and petty warlords. This film is about that society so there's not many smiles per minute!
Although a very talented writer - his DOORWAY TO HELL really was one of the very best of the early thirties gangster pictures (better than LITTLE CAESAR) but as a director he was more an enthusiastic amateur than a filmmaker. This film is packed with so much story that it doesn't quite allow enough time to develop the characters. As is often the case with first movies, he possibly tries to squeeze too many ideas into his seventy minutes? This is the first film he directed and it unfortunately shows. He doesn't quite manage to make his actors into real people. Marguerite Churchill, for example, one of the most beautiful actresses ever to grace the screen is completely wasted in this - she only has about ten lines. Her role is just decoration. And "For the ladies" there's George Raft - again we don't get to know him.
The big, big, big difference between this and the thirties' best gangster movie, PUBLIC ENEMY is that William Wellman's film was about a person you could relate to. It had focus. Cagney's character wasn't exactly likeable but you felt you knew enough about him to want to know more. You could understand why he was the way he was. Spencer Tracy doesn't feel like someone you'd want to know - he's thoroughly unpleasant.
In summary, this is a well-made film, it's watchable, interesting and entertaining but to be critical, it does lack emotional engagement. Like Brown's (excellent) DOORWAY TO HELL (and also SCARFACE), this invests most of its effort into reflecting early thirties society than telling us about the characters and what makes them tick. As a time machine it's brilliant in transporting you, body and soul to the grimy, gritty and dangerous streets of 1931. If you want a sense of that era, this is perfect.