WARNING SPOILERS: This review is from the point of view of one who would rather we live in a world without Mafias, organized crime, and gangs. From the perspective of crime itself, I can almost admire the cat burgler, the bank robber, or even the pickpocket, whereas I find organized crime to be vile, albeit efficient. Regarding violence itself, I much prefer the old-style, manlier ways of settling scores such as showdowns, brawls, and duels instead of use of hit men, goons, and sub-machine guns, which may keep the "head" alive, but which reduces the heart.
In this vein, I found a great poignancy within the usual discomfort I have when viewing gangster films. Tom's assertion towards his end, "I ain't so tough," and his hospital apology to his family, showed me that the filmmakers understood this unmanliness, and that organized crime is about greed and cowardice more than necessity and triumph of will. Mike's lecture to Tom concerning Tom's lack of heart and brain also gives pause, so that (if you agree with the filmmakers) one can define very simply the typical gangster's actions. And there is little in the annals of true-life Mafia activity, whether Italian, Korean, Chinese, Negro, or what-have-you, which overthrows this.
In all honesty, I found James Cagney's character to be over-the-top, in the usual Hollywood fashion (other examples: Joe Pesci, James Caan), and his mobster actions were predictable, for the most part. This jibed well with my disgusted side. On the other hand, Glasmon and Bright (the writers) explore some complicated issues which touched me greatly. This may be due to Bright's first-hand experiences with gangsters.
First, Tom's "purity" while in a relationship with Gwen (Jean Harlow). This adult content surprised me, especially for a 1931 action movie, and one of the first talkies. When Jane (Mia Marvin) seduces a drunken Tom, their morning-after becomes not only a surprising slap in the face for all concerned (including the viewer), but also sets up the motivation for Matt's (Edward Doyle) demise.
Second, Tom's relationship with his brother is very provocative. There is the usual macho posturing of right vs. wrong, but there are also undercurrents of gray areas. Who is worse: Tom, for bootlegging, or Mike for petty embezzlement? Tom, for being an enforcer, or Mike, for indiscriminate killing during wartime? Naturally, the case can be made that Mike's heroics pave the way for the free country which Tom enjoys, but this is never explored, merely left to conjecture. Quite pleasing, from both a cinematic and literary standpoint. The content of this counterpoint was present but not overbearing.
Third, there is the possibility that Tom is sexually-oriented in two ways. I'm not in any way trying to foist such opinions on anyone, but it seems to me that Putty-Nose's (Murray Kinnell) butt is awfully close to Tom's face during the pool-room scene early in the movie. Also, why is Tom "not the marrying kind" and why does he harbor such obvious distaste for most women? It's certainly not due to his sweet mother, or benign sister-in-law. I'm not FOR these types of references or innuendo, but I merely point it out as possible.
Fourth is the searing commentary on Prohibition itself, and how it was that a combination of governmental and temperance forces allowed opportunity to knock for those with little conscience (even if Paddy {Robert Emmett O'Connor} is made to be an honorable man here).
These, however, are side issues to the film. The action itself is bearable and fluid. The making of the small-time hustler into sweeping gangster is not fully-explored, but merely assumed, and then there is an alternating mega- and micro-look into that crooked world. We see glimpses of thievery, crooked business deals, strong-arm protection and racketeering, cold-blooded murder, and revenge. Then, we are privy to the inner workings of mob mentality, the unbreakable friendships, the gun molls, the hideouts. Little attention is paid here to law enforcement, and the regular Joe and the media are fashioned to be in sympathy with the mobs, a likely by-product of the "wetness" which rumrunners brought to those otherwise-"dry" times.
All in all, I enjoyed this movie, with its many messages, visuals, and vignettes. Cagney is a great actor, although this is not his pivotal work. Harlow is sultry in a minor role. Woods is extremely likable as Tom's compatriot. Joan Blondell brings some of her bubbliness to these drab surroundings. Donald Cook is wonderfully-old-school in his eye-rolling part. Beryl Mercer as Ma Powers also evokes some surprisingly-good emoting.
Overall, I think you will enjoy this.
In this vein, I found a great poignancy within the usual discomfort I have when viewing gangster films. Tom's assertion towards his end, "I ain't so tough," and his hospital apology to his family, showed me that the filmmakers understood this unmanliness, and that organized crime is about greed and cowardice more than necessity and triumph of will. Mike's lecture to Tom concerning Tom's lack of heart and brain also gives pause, so that (if you agree with the filmmakers) one can define very simply the typical gangster's actions. And there is little in the annals of true-life Mafia activity, whether Italian, Korean, Chinese, Negro, or what-have-you, which overthrows this.
In all honesty, I found James Cagney's character to be over-the-top, in the usual Hollywood fashion (other examples: Joe Pesci, James Caan), and his mobster actions were predictable, for the most part. This jibed well with my disgusted side. On the other hand, Glasmon and Bright (the writers) explore some complicated issues which touched me greatly. This may be due to Bright's first-hand experiences with gangsters.
First, Tom's "purity" while in a relationship with Gwen (Jean Harlow). This adult content surprised me, especially for a 1931 action movie, and one of the first talkies. When Jane (Mia Marvin) seduces a drunken Tom, their morning-after becomes not only a surprising slap in the face for all concerned (including the viewer), but also sets up the motivation for Matt's (Edward Doyle) demise.
Second, Tom's relationship with his brother is very provocative. There is the usual macho posturing of right vs. wrong, but there are also undercurrents of gray areas. Who is worse: Tom, for bootlegging, or Mike for petty embezzlement? Tom, for being an enforcer, or Mike, for indiscriminate killing during wartime? Naturally, the case can be made that Mike's heroics pave the way for the free country which Tom enjoys, but this is never explored, merely left to conjecture. Quite pleasing, from both a cinematic and literary standpoint. The content of this counterpoint was present but not overbearing.
Third, there is the possibility that Tom is sexually-oriented in two ways. I'm not in any way trying to foist such opinions on anyone, but it seems to me that Putty-Nose's (Murray Kinnell) butt is awfully close to Tom's face during the pool-room scene early in the movie. Also, why is Tom "not the marrying kind" and why does he harbor such obvious distaste for most women? It's certainly not due to his sweet mother, or benign sister-in-law. I'm not FOR these types of references or innuendo, but I merely point it out as possible.
Fourth is the searing commentary on Prohibition itself, and how it was that a combination of governmental and temperance forces allowed opportunity to knock for those with little conscience (even if Paddy {Robert Emmett O'Connor} is made to be an honorable man here).
These, however, are side issues to the film. The action itself is bearable and fluid. The making of the small-time hustler into sweeping gangster is not fully-explored, but merely assumed, and then there is an alternating mega- and micro-look into that crooked world. We see glimpses of thievery, crooked business deals, strong-arm protection and racketeering, cold-blooded murder, and revenge. Then, we are privy to the inner workings of mob mentality, the unbreakable friendships, the gun molls, the hideouts. Little attention is paid here to law enforcement, and the regular Joe and the media are fashioned to be in sympathy with the mobs, a likely by-product of the "wetness" which rumrunners brought to those otherwise-"dry" times.
All in all, I enjoyed this movie, with its many messages, visuals, and vignettes. Cagney is a great actor, although this is not his pivotal work. Harlow is sultry in a minor role. Woods is extremely likable as Tom's compatriot. Joan Blondell brings some of her bubbliness to these drab surroundings. Donald Cook is wonderfully-old-school in his eye-rolling part. Beryl Mercer as Ma Powers also evokes some surprisingly-good emoting.
Overall, I think you will enjoy this.