Riot in Cell Block 11

Riot in Cell Block 11 comes as a bit of a shock, but not because of its brutality (it's a cuddly little puppy compared to Jules Dassin's Brute Force). The shock is that Don Siegel, later to become inextricably associated with such violent and/or reactionary movies as his remake of The Killers, Madigan and Dirty Harry, turned out a temperate, balanced and humane look at prison conditions; another shock is that the movie emerged in the middle of a complacent decade not remembered for its sympathy to marginalized groups in American society.

The droning voice-over that opens the movie doesn't bode well: It warns of a wave of riots throughout penitentiaries across the country and even takes us to a criminal-justice convention in Toronto where the topic is aired. But soon we're inside Cell Block 11, part of a run-down, overcrowded institution whose warden (Emile Meyer) has been campaigning for reforms, to no avail. (Standing up for convicted criminals, then and now, is political suicide.) When opportunity knocks, the inmates take over the asylum. What they want is press coverage of their quite moderate demands: More elbow room, separate facilities for the mentally ill among them, job training. But they've taken guards as hostages, and threaten to execute them if their demands aren't met.

Leader of the rebels is Neville Brand, who tries to negotiate in good faith, but Meyer has one hand tied behind his back – by Frank Faylen, a hard-line state bureaucrat. Brand, too, has trouble keeping the prisoners in line, particularly those who see the riot less as a cause than as a chance for some cheap thrills. Siegel manages to keep the story taut within the claustrophobic confines of the prison and without too much in the way of splashy incident, until he brings it to a surprisingly rueful end. Somehow, he has managed to make an issues movie told almost solely through action.

Siegel's career proved that he had more sides to him than he's generally known for. He started out cutting montages in other directors' movies (Blues in the Night and The Hard Way among them); when he moved into directing, his early work showed range in style and tone: The period thriller The Verdict, the light-hearted noir The Big Steal, the eschatological drama Night Unto Night. Too bad we can't remember him by saying that he just got better and better, because, unfortunately, it just isn't so.

"Riot in Cell Block 11" is a very good, very tough prison movie. However, I should also warn you that it's also got a very strong and not especially subtle message...and could have been handled a bit less obviously. The producer had an axe to grind...and it's too obvious. On the other hand, it is a nice contrast to the usual evil jerks in prison film.

When the film begins, there is a preachy prologue about prison riots and how they are the fault of the politicians and the people for allowing prisons to become that rotten. While to some extent this is true, the message come on about as subtly at a baseball bat against your skull. Then the film begins, a fictionalized account of prisoners rioting at a prison and the ineffectiveness and duplicitous nature of public officials in dealing with it. Again and again, the Warden advises for restraint and seems very much in agreement with most of the prisoners' demands...and time and again, the powers that be think the best way to handle the prisoners is to bluster and lie.

So if the film comes off as a bit preachy, why do I still give it a 7 (and I was tempted to give it an 8)? Well, the acting is really terrific. Neville Brand is great as the prisoner in charge of the rioters and the rest of the actors did a really nice job. Had the message been toned down a tad, the film might have earned a 9.

Here is a jail flick made in sympathy to the prisoners, not that this was so rare before criminals became much more violent in the 1960's. Fed up with the inhumane conditions within the penal system, the inmates rebel. A guard is knocked out and locked up, his keys used to free the other prisoners, and the jail is overtaken in short order. The scene where the prisoners yell and empty the contents of their cells everywhere makes for powerful cinematography.

The prisoners make their demands known, and they want them printed in the papers for all the public to see. They want to be involved in a work program instead of sitting idle; they want the jail to be less crowded and better organized. If their needs are not met, guards will be killed, and the blame will be placed on the penal system authorities. The liberal warden of the prison actually wants to grant their demands, but his budget is constrained by politicians far removed from the system, and thus he is helpless as the clock ticks down.

The film is non-stop excitement and drama. I liked seeing the relationship between the prisoners, and their roles in the revolt. Neville Brand, with a gravelly voice and a build like a Sherman tank, is perfectly cast as the group leader and negotiator.

The movie is based on a story of an actual prison riot in the 1950s, and producer Walter Wanger's experiences as an inmate. Isn't it odd that celebrities get religion on the issue of prison reform AFTER they have been behind bars? Dan Rostenkowski comes to mind too.

Producer Walter Wanger wanted to make a film that exposed the appalling conditions of the prison community - and having been incarcerated himself after shooting a man he was sure was having an affair with his wife - had plenty of personal experience.

The resulting 1954 80 minute gritty drama, almost an unprecedented certificate 15, even now, was directed by Don Siegel. Following a popular format in those days, it starts off with a social documentary approach, complete with concerned voice-over - that this is a public announcement, part expose, part drama. It is not based on fact, at least not from one singular incident.

As you might expect, we follow prison guards (my title is the warning given to them, as they arm-up to thwart the riot), politicians and those who shape policy and of course, a handful of inmates. These provide everyday backbone; their tales are simple and uncomplicated and it's impossible to not side with them, or at least their plight. As ring- leaders take guards hostage, it becomes a nail-biting cat and mouse scenario, with Dunn (Neville Brand) producing ultimatums. Warden Emile Meyer wants negotiation, state officials want only swift force.

The film is well made and tautly directed, efficient but doesn't feel rushed. The version I saw on TCM (Turner Classic Movies) had a slight green cast but was generally good. I imagine that Riot In would have been compelling and possibly controversial viewing for cinema goers. It would have found favour especially amongst those who liked the hard crime film-noir type of dramas of the day, but without any of the glamour of femme fetales.

My guess is that whilst many prison dramas had been made at this point, they were character-lead and not out to socially comment. This would have been as hard-hitting as any TV '60 Minute' (etc) documentary and because it's still a good and credible film, it's still within the public domain, though is rarely shown and expensive to buy.

I hadn't even heard of this movie before until I stumbled upon the DVD of it at my neighborhood video store, and I decided to take a risk and rent it. After watching it, I'm glad I took a chance. Though the movie does seem a little tame when compared to modern day prison movies, it still packs a decent sized punch. It does bring up some of the brutal things prisoners have to go through, as well as the sometimes brutal behavior of prisoners themselves. And the way things are wrapped up at the end does come across as believable. The authentic feel of the movie is greatly assisted by shooting in a real prison with real inmates and guards.

If I have a complaint about the movie, it would be that none of the characters are really examined deeply. I would have liked to have learned more about some of the ringleaders of the riot, as well as some of the guards. Though such deeper examinations might have made the movie much longer than the lean yet efficient eighty minute running time, and the movie might have dragged. But that's a minor problem; the movie as a whole works very well.