The Numbers Racket


So, is there something a little more thick and complex than I first suspected with this film? No, I'm not refering to the brilliantly written anti-capitalist socio-economic theme. I'm talking about the recurring rise of numbers, almost as characters, in the plot. Surely, 776 plays a big role as that which, if he or she who plays the game is loyal to it, will be the key to wealth. But there is also a bit of superstition here. It seems that Leo's bank is the (unlucky) 13th in Tucker's corporation. Perhaps the strangest, and the most subtle, is that, when Joe goes up to visit and put the pressure on his brother, we see that Leo and Sylvia live in apartment number 665 - "the neighbor of the beast." This must be symbolic of the fact that, though Leo has a good heart (in spirit), his work and his business place him right next to the pure evil that is embedded in the numbers racket, and quite plain and obvious in the character of Tucker.
Of course, there's always the possibility that I am just reading way too much into this. I'd sure like to know...

reply

I picked up on the 13th and 665 references as well.
I think we are probably reading too much into it, although it's fun to ponder. Certainly number theory and the random nature of fate in a noir universe could come into play.

reply

hmm, yes.
...or is Polonsky suggesting that, in the evil business of this film, there is nothing random about it, and that, as shown, the fix is in in such a world?
I read an analysis from THE BFI COMPANION TO CRIME (Phil Hardy, 1997) that said that in Force of Evil "...the reduction of human life to money and numbers...(is) there for all to see."
Yes, definitely dark - truly noir.

reply

I thought 776 was a pun on 1776 inviting a satirical reading.

Marlon the Cat 1991-17th October 2005

reply

To me,illegal gambling epitomises the phrase "victimless crime."There was/is no justification for the petty blue laws against it.I see those who break victimless crime laws as heroes;their enforcers are the real criminals.

reply