The “gangster film” is a true American creation. There were of course many early foreign films with elements of “crime” in them (Feuillade’s Les Vampires, or Lang’s Dr. Mabuse to name just a few), but the European crime films seemed more preoccupied with secret societies and grand Bond-villain-like master plans. Early American gangster films were all about one man’s rise to power (and subsequent fall) through crime, something which they merely saw as a “left handed form of human endeavor”.
The seeds of the American gangster film can be found in the seminal crime films from the teens: The Musketeers of Pig Alley (1912) and Regeneration (1915) (even perhaps the hold up in The Great Train Robbery (1903) which gave audiences their first thrill at the excitement of crime). But I would say it wasn’t until Sternberg’s 1927 film Underworld that the first real “gangster” film was made. This was of course because it wasn’t until prohibition and the “Roaring Twenties” that organized crime (the backbone of the American gangster film) really rose to power.
By 1931, the huge successes of Public Enemy and Little Caeser (in addition to the even more impressive Scarface the following year) ensured that the 1930’s would be a decade full of many fine examples of the genre. The main character was usually portrayed as a product of the social conditions he lived in, and his quick and ruthless rise to power was nothing less than a subverted version of the American dream. Eventually he would rise too high and his empire would come crashing down in an obligatory last stand shootout with the police. The public ate it up since “the highwayman” has always been more exciting than the “do-gooder”. The censors hemmed and hawed about the glorification of violence and crime, but so long as the title character met (often bloody) justice at the end there wasn’t a lot more they could do about it in the face of the public’s ravenous appetite for these films.
But by 1941, with the film High Sierra, Raoul Walsh (perhaps the most important gangster film director with such fine films as Regeneration, The Roaring Twenties and White Heat to his name) signaled a new direction for the American gangster film. It was not merely the introduction of noir elements, it was his modification of what it meant to be a “doomed gangster” that made his film so important.
To be sure, the gangster was always doomed. But, before High Sierra this doom was in more of a Faustian sense. He wanted too much, flew too high, and caused everything to come crumbling down. There was always the sense that he could have kept it all had he been able to control his unchecked ambition. Of course history itself worked against the gangster–everyone knows that the “salad days” of bootlegging and machine guns were only to last until prohibition was repealed, a fact that is always present in the back of the viewer’s mind while watching these films.
With High Sierra it is apparent from the beginning that we are dealing with something different. Roy Earl is sprung (unable to escape himself, even his prison release is part of events set into motion beyond his control) from prison in the opening scene by implied bribes and right away returns to the world of crime. There is no question of doing anything else, crime is an inseparable part of who Roy is. He is neither just a citizen who has turned to a life of crime due to his social circumstances, nor is he just someone who has had a taste of the spoils of crime and doesn’t want to go back. Instead, Roy is a professional and he chooses crime because it is the one thing he is completely competent and comfortable at.
Unlike the gangster protagonists of the 30’s, Roy Earl is not a power hungry man on the rise. He is actually an example of what would have happened had one of the gangster protagonists of the 30’s escaped their bloody demise, taking with them the wisdom of experience to temper their unchecked ambition. The world has no room for his kind any more, yet he is still there, out of place and hopelessly trying to continue doing the only thing he knows how to do.
This is the source of Roy’s doom, he is living in a world that has no place for him. This is evident at every turn in High Sierra. Roy’s only friend who set up the heist (a last remnant of the old days) is dying and working with a dirty “copper”, Roy’s professionalism seems out of place next to the hot headed young thugs he’s saddled with on the job, and to drive the point home there is the family with the pretty daughter that Roy foolishly thinks he has a chance with. But she is not from his world, and his one attempt to pursue her, knowing full well that he could never change, ends in disaster, despite, importantly, the fact that she never even finds out who he really is.
With High Sierra, the blueprint was created for the more nihilistic and existentially bleak gangster films of the future. The roots of John Huston’s monumental Asphalt Jungle and the French gangster films of Melville, Becker and Dassin can be seen in High Sierra. No longer were the possibilities of the gangster film limited to showing a more titillating version of the American “little guy makes big” dream with a tacked on bloody comeuppance ending. The implications of what it meant to live a life outside of society were examined in depth, changing the gangster film into a study of alienation and an unflinching dedication to professionalism despite it all. For Roy Earl in High Sierra, the only thing that stands in his way is the world he lives in, but that won’t stop him from slapping a few “coppers” around until the world finally manages to catch him.
8 Comments
I really enjoyed High Sierra too. Bogart plays such a cool character in all of his films, but this one was really fun. His feeble attempts to become something other than what he was, both with the crippled girl and the plan with the later wife, were very well done. You could just sense that there was no way that either of those things would happen, but that didn’t keep you from cheering him on and hoping that he would succeed.
Between this film and Asphalt Jungle I have really enjoyed this genre of film. That underlying sense of desperation to be something else with the knowledge that they will always be what they are is really compelling. What are some other ones you would recommend? I have heard Scarface is excellent. Maybe another top ten?
Hey there, never got back to your request for a gangster list, so here’s an unofficial one:
In the 1930’s gangster movies were all about prohibition and the previous decade.
Public Enemy and Little Caeser started the trend and the are both worth checking out. Then Scarface came along (not the Pacino version of course), I really love that movie. The other highlight of the decade for me is The Roaring Twenties. Petrified Forest and Key Largo are also pretty great (similar stories, Bogart is a great bad guy in Petrified Forest, but the sissy boy good guy is annoying). Finally, White Heat is a great ending for the decade, awesome Cagney movie.
Then, gangster films kind of moved more in the direction of High Sierra and Asphault Jungle. It seems odd, but there are some awesome French Gangster films. I’d say check out Rififi (very much like Asphault Jungle) and Touchez Paz au Grisbi …if you like those I can recommend some more.
After that came The Godfather, and it was pretty much mafia movies from then on. Anyway, that should be enough for you to work on for a while! 🙂
Saw Scarface (1930s) this weekend. It was really good. I particularly enjoyed the unraveling of the main character as he slowly becomes completely alone. The blatant undercurrents speaking out against organized crime was neat with an understanding of the time it was filmed, and it was fascinating to think about what the people who actually participated in some of the events who were still alive and free thought of it. Each of the characters was portrayed with a refinement that really drew you in to connect to each one, all the way from the police commissioner to the boss over the main character to the sister to the mother at home. The main character’s performance though just took the cake. It was arguably one of the best single performances I have seen.
I don’t know what is next on my list, but I am sure you will hear about it after I see it.
Nice, yeah Scarface really set the bar pretty high. That final shootout with the police had been done before, but Scarface is the movie I always think of when I think of that kind of scene. Supposedly that movie was part of the reason Hollywood started enforcing its production code. Which if you think about it, it was a pretty violent movie, quite a body count in that one.
Like Tony said, “do it first, do it yourself, and keep on doing it”!
Also, you brought up the fact that some of those dudes were still alive…I think I heard Al Capone (who only shared the same nickname, Tony Camonte was based on someone else I think) really loved the movie.
It has been a little while since I saw it, but I saw Roaring ‘20s. It was excellent. I thought the end was particularly well done. You know it is going to end bad for Cagney, but you just get excited that he is going to make it anyways. The shootout with Bogart had me on the edge of my seat, and Bogart’s death was great. He portrayed that doomed fear of a dying man very well.
I have to admit that after watching these three films I had to take a break from this genre. You get connected to these doomed characters and no matter how much you will them to pull through, they always get plugged in the end. It was kind of depressing. I had to go back and watch a few good John Wayne movies to cheer me back up again.
Yeah…I kind of got into it here but would like to take a closer look on how necessary the “Doomed” part of these movies is. I know it probably started with the censors saying that “crime can’t pay” so they always have to die in the end…but I think it works beyond that even if I too just want them to get out ok on the other end for once!
I decided to dive back in to this group of films and saw Rififi yesterday. It was very well done. Once again the characters were all very compelling, and it was disheartening when they all got theirs in the end. I thought the visuals of the black and white with great contrasts and the tone of the music really made this film even better than some of the American counterparts. I have decided though that this genre is not for me. From my last post I was already headed that way, but this film really put me over the edge. I would much rather be entertained by a film where the good guys always win or at least some semblance of that. These films are just depressing. I almost shut the movie off right after the heist because I knew what was coming, but I couldn’t draw myself away from seeing the inevitable end. I guess that is the point.
Yeah, and they pretty much all end like that. I think it’s more than just the “bad guys gotta pay” of the 30s, by the 60s, their “doom” was just part of the archetype I guess. More a reflection on the absurdity of the world than anything they did wrong. I also love the focus on professionalism…that super long totally silent heist scene in Rififi is a good example…those guys were total professionals. I’d stay away from others in the same genre if they are bumming you out though…things never go so well after the heist…