I'm underwhelmed by a supposed 'classic' film
Wow - this is sooo bad - poor/over-acting ... even cpl yrs after "talkies" came out - this is still basically a silent film -
share[deleted]
Sorry but I too just watched this for the first time and came away puzzled by its classic status. I love the WB gangster flicks, but even taking into account that this came out in the very first years of talking movies, it's pretty damn awkward and stilted. Much of the dialogue is hackneyed and delivered with high-school caliber emotion, white the facial expressions are right out of a pro wrestling match. Story was decent but not given much time to develop. Fortunately, the quality of the gangster genre would grow exponentially in a short time.
shareAll due respect.. it doesn't seem like you're "taking into account" much of anything.
IF you were taking the "early Talky" prospect into account, you would realize that Hollywood had a long and alkward adjustment into sound. Performers still had the exaturated expressions neccesary for so many films where sound was not present. And since sound technology was limited at the time, diologue likewise needed to be exaturated just to be picked up by the mics!
Add to that, The Depression, which was just beginning when this came out. Through much of the time in question, the last thing people wanted was reality on the screen. Reality sucked. The more "corny and larger than life", the better.
Not to mention, if it were not for this picture, there would be NO Gangster Genre at all. This was the first, folks.
Is it shaky and corny? Sure. But they used what they had, and it was what it was. Judging a film based on standards set by films that were influenced by it is simply absurd.
When judging a film or TV show, I really wish people would do so taking into account the time and circumstances in which it was made... not by the standards of today.
The more complex the mind.. the greater the need for the simplicity of play"
This was not the first gangster film - there were silent gangster movies, but nothing like this. Little Caesar is kind of a reflection of the American Dream - start at the bottom and work your way to the top. However, when ever you are at the top, others start gunning for you - in this case, literally and figuratively.
One of the things to remember when watching some of these really early gangster films of the sound era - it was hearing the guns that made a huge impact. Also, many times, there was someone firing real bullets - usually a WWI veteran. If you see bits of a building getting fired at and concrete chipping away from each bullet - that was live ammunition causing the damage - not controlled explosions set off from somewhere off set.
Some of the dialog may seem corny, but the author (W. R. Burnett) of the book knew many Chicago area gangsters and small time hoods of the 1920s - and, knew how they talked.
If it wasn’t for the success of Little Caesar, Warner Brothers would not have made The Public Enemy, Scarface, The Roaring Twenties, High Sierra, and all their other classic gangster films of the 1930s. There probably would not have a Godfather, Goodfellas, etc. either - at least not in the way they were made.
One more thing to keep in mind, at this time, there wasn’t a Production Code or a ratings system. The audience could consist of small children to the elderly.
So I watched this after "The Doorway to Hell", and I have to say this was way inferior. The script just wasn't there. The entire Douglas Fairbanks Jr. storyline felt tacked on and could easily be edited out of the film without missing a beat. The only enjoyable aspect was watching Robinson chew through the scenery.
share