The Roaring Twenties

Most of the famous gangster films were made in the early part of the decade, before the infamous Production Code took all the sex and violence out of the movies, and before they figured out how to make decent movies with sound. The landmark films of the genre like "Little Caesar" and "Public Enemy" are actually kind of poorly made, by modern standards.

Not so this entertaining film, it's full of life and energy and great fun to watch. James Cagney gives a wonderful performance as a dynamic and ambitious man who goes from a barely-eating taxi driver to a gang lord, and back again. Humphrey Bogart gives one of his best pre-Casablanca villain performances, and even generic leading lady Priscilla Land is fresh and likeable.

The only quibble I have with this film is it lacks the immediacy of the earlier "ripped from the headlines" films. It's made about days that had since gone by, and owes more to earlier films than the reality of the day (post-modernism in the thirties?). Still, it's great fun, do see it.

I got a kick out of this flick having seen in on TCM. In fact I get a kick out of all TCM movies because there are no commercials so whether you like or dislike Ted Turner, I gotta thank the man for giving us that channel and that format. It's just like sitting in the Bijou after buying a ticket for a quarter and a box of popcorn for a dime. Those were the days. When we hear the names Cagney and Bogart,what's taken for granted? Both were legends. Hollywood immortals whom as long as film is preserved, will never really be dead and "The Roaring Twenties" showcased the dynamic duo to the Nth degree. Bogie did not get top billing as did Jimmy however shining throughout that entire movie was unmistakable greatness yet to come from the guy with the impressive speech impediment. His villainous,conniving rotten gangster disposition was there to exploit in how many more films with him? And Cagney too was contemptible but in a nicer way-if indeed that makes any sense whatsoever. I guess I mean to write that if Cagney would shoot someone, he'd first apologize and then perhaps pay for the funeral.But when Bogie shot, his followup would be two or three more right to the gut. Regarding the story line of the film, it's quite straightfoward. Bogie and Cagney meet as Doughboys in France in W.W.I. The war ends, a few years later the Volstead Act becomes law which gives birth to bootlegging, rival murder etc. Jimmy, who's nuts about a gal who sings and is just out of high school is warned by his pal in booze,Bogie,that the gal is two-timing him for their lawyer and so forth and so on. A one time rock solid friendship between Cagney and Bogart disintegrate and why go on? See the film. It's classic gangster stuff and highly enjoyable.

Two of the most famous actors of their day - James Cagney and Humphrey Bogart - are featured here, along with two very interesting women (Priscilla Lane and Gladys George). That foursome would be fun to join anywhere.

Lane is the wholesome pretty girl and George is the tough female bar owner. The latter may not look as good but she delivers the best film noir lines in the movie near the end.

In addition, Jefferey Lynn is good as the clean-cut, nice-guy attorney and Frank McHugh draws laughs as Cagney's buddy (as in real life). Paul Kelly is convincing as a hood.

With this cast, you know you are going to get a well-acted movie. It moves at a good pace, too, with few lulls. The gangster language of the period was fun to hear.

The first time I saw this film I was disappointed. Maybe I expected too much. On the second viewing, I throughly enjoyed it. Having a great DVD transfer on the second viewing didn't hurt, either. It's a nice sharp picture.

Sometimes I come to a film because it looks like it can directly fulfill, sometimes because it can provide precious background to other things that matter, letting them stand.

It's watchable in itself, this one; a misfit's rise and fall played against the passing of times. Released on the cusp of WWII, it opened a portal back to more careless times, taking us on a journey from WWI trenches through the highs of Prohibition to the lows of Depression, so we could have this clear moral stance: in the new world there's no room for scoundrels. Right.

Interesting here is that only a year or two before Citizen Kane we have a similar saga about the passing of the times, but one that asks no fundamental question of us, casts no doubt on its testimony. It's as lurid and constructed as newspaper headlines of the time, a main contrast in Welles' film about its world-creating newspaperman. It's machinegun history written in the staccato sounds of a newspaperman's typewriter.

What I really wanted to see though was Cagney.

I am in the middle of a film noir quest looking for its machinery, and as an aside I was brought to explore its roots in 1930's crime stuff. Cagney is a force in this niche. He had so much energy that he could turn into presence. He is not just amused, he doesn't coast on pushing things back like Bogart; he throws himself on the encounter, bitterly cutting himself on the edges.

Not so here. He was asked to play a basically decent guy led astray by the prospect of easy money, meaning to reflect the broader American endeavor that ended on Black Tuesday. Usually in a Cagney film he lets loose in the end. They asked of him here the precise opposite; he sleepwalks, numbed by failure, a human ruin clawing at redemption. He looks like he gives it his all, but it's just not who he is. It's as if you asked Welles to strut like Wayne.

If you want to see Cagney in top form, look him up in Footlight Parade fully in command of a show, White Heat to see him face real demons.

... before Bogart's star really begins to rise in the 1940's though not at Cagney's expense, but instead at George Raft's. But I digress.

The Roaring Twenties traces about 20 years of American history, from 1917 to the mid 1930s, starting with three men in a fox hole in France in WWI - Eddie Bartlett (James Cagney), George Hally (Humphrey Bogart), and Lloyd Hart (Jeffrey Lynn). You get to know their basic character here. Lloyd doesn't want to shoot a German soldier because he's just a kid of about 15. George shoots him instead and seems to enjoy it. Immediately afterwards the war ends. No thought or mention of the 15 year old who just bought it seconds before the war ended. As for Eddie - He is pragmatic. He doesn't enjoy violence but realizes it is sometimes necessary.

Back in America, Eddie can't catch a break and find a job. His old job was given to somebody else, so he drives his friend's (Frank McHugh as Danny) cab when Danny is off duty in order to make ends meet. One day, after Prohibition begins, Eddie delivers a package for a fare and ends up getting caught for violating the Volstead act - the package has liquor in it. The woman who would have gone to jail, saloon keeper Panama (Gladys George) pays Eddie's fine and brings him into the liquor business with her. Eddie can be tough, but he hasn't had to use gunplay until he decides to expand and bring his old war buddy George into the business. George, the guy who enjoys killing, gets Eddie in deeper as far as the violence goes, and George's slimy little weasel ways are Eddie's ultimate undoing.

So Cagney's character is the tough guy with which you can sympathize - he didn't start out a criminal but was rejected by the country he served and the woman he loved, Bogart is the evil guy who is at least smart enough to not play the stock market in 1929, and Gladys George is the tough "broad" who loves Cagney's Eddie but realizes it will never be mutual. Surrounding all of this is a great score with that brassy Warner Brothers orchestra front and center.

This is not the best of the 1930s gangster films - Those were made in the precode era when they could be more realistic. But this one has WB's best contract players and stars of the era and is a fun ride with a minimum of moralizing considering this is a production code era film.