Il pericolo pubblico n. 1

The blond bomb shell, Jean Harlow,(Daisy Stevens),"Reckless",'35 gave an outstanding performance and some of her outfits showed off all the wonderful things males love in a woman during the 1930's and still DO ! Walter Houston,(Capt. Jim Fitzpatrick),"The Great Sinner",'49, played a rough and tough Irish Captain who did not mess around with the mob and especially Jean Hersholt, who really did not fit very well in this role. Jean Hersholt played very few roles as the bad guy during the 1920's and 30's and was a good actor in the radio days. J. Carrol Naish,(Pietro Cholo),"The Beast With Five Fingers",'46, was very young and gave a great supporting role on his way to a fantastic career on the Silver Screen. The ending of this film is great and I thought it was very well directed and produced.

Grim and gritty pre-Code crime drama about a tough-as-nails police captain (Walter Huston) with a hard-on for wiping out crime. His brother (Wallace Ford) falls for a vampy bad girl (Jean Harlow). Through her, he gets involved with gangster Sam Belmonte (a miscast Jean Hersholt). This leads to an inevitable clash between brothers.

Well-directed and well-written with solid acting, especially for 1932. Harlow is her usual alluring self. Huston is great in a part that is not very sympathetic, despite his being the protagonist. Early work by J. Carrol Naish as Hersholt's henchman, Cholo. Speaking of Hersholt, he was the only suspect casting. I'm not bashing Hersholt because he was a fine actor. But hearing him spout gangster slang through his thick accent was a little silly. Mickey Rooney has a small part as one of Huston's kids.

Another great Walter Huston movie from the '30s. He made a lot of interesting ones. The aim of this particular film is to glorify cops not criminals. At least that's what the Herbert Hoover-signed message before the credits says. Yet the ultimate message of the movie is that in order for the cops to stop the criminals, they have to abandon the rule of law and take matters into their own hands. The final shoot-out between the gangsters and the vigilante cops is amazing.

The prologue says it all—people need to support the cops, not the gangsters. After all, it's 1932, the depths of the depression, and cops are seen by much of the public as enforcers of a broken system. Desperadoes like Dillinger, Baby-Face Nelson, and Bonnie & Clyde are romanticized as ordinary folks driven to robbing hated banks. At the same time, romanticizing films such as Public Enemy (1931) and Little Caesar (1931) are smash hits at the box-office. Tellingly, cops are depicted here as opposing a crime boss's (Belmonte) attempt to take over the city, not busting up strikes, enforcing repossessions, or chasing down dashing desperadoes.

It's a pretty good crime movie up to the ridiculous climax, where the two sides look like warring armies engaged in a frontier showdown. Why a police chief would deploy his men so recklessly is a real stretch. But, never mind, since there's a metaphorical point at stake here —namely, that police will honorably and bravely defend families no matter the personal cost to them, much as seen in popular Western movies. As a result, what makes for a positive social message is seen in the shootout as not necessarily translating into persuasive cinema.

Harlow makes for a convincing trollop—note her pre-Code liking for pain when properly done! Also, Walter Huston remains one of the fine forgotten actors from this period. Here, he again shows a real ability to convey strong emotion in an understated way. The movie also benefits from LA street locations. It's always a kick to see the styles and fashions from that long ago time. Anyway, taken in its time period, the movie remains very revealing in more ways than one.

The Beast Of The City finds Walter Huston cast as a crusading and honest cop, possibly too rigidly honest. His character is a whole lot like Kirk Douglas's detective in Detective Story that would come out a generation later.

The film also borrows a lot from westerns at the time. Huston's unknown western city is ruled by gangster Jean Hersholt who is apparently untouchable as far as the law is concerned. A whole lot like real life gangsters Al Capone and Lucky Luciano who were coming into prominence.

Huston's family life is secure enough, wife Dorothy Peterson, a few kids among them a young Mickey Rooney. He also has his younger and weaker brother Wallace Ford living with them. Ford's got a real good deal, no rent and he apparently chases a lot of skirts. That proves to be his downfall and eventually Huston's.

The skirt that did them in belonged to Jean Harlow. Jean was never a better mantrap in her career than she is The Beast Of The City. Wallace Ford turns out to be putty in her hands.

Also note another good performance in The Beast Of The City is that of Tully Marshall who plays Hersholt's lawyer. The word shyster was invented for lawyers like Marshall, but he's good to have on your side especially if you're guilty as sin.

The climax is an unforgettable one and one more typical to a western than a modern drama. It's what makes The Beast Of The City a classic that is too rarely seen today.

This is one of the grittiest of the pre-Production Code features. It is important to realize that just two years later, with the implementation of the rewritten Production Code in 1934, this film could not have been made.

As with any piece of popular entertainment that is nearly 70 years old, there are going to be dated elements. What is more important is how relatively modern this film feels, especially compared to the films made under the Production Code after 1934. The story is a hard slice of life, and it will not suit all tastes. This is especially true for those who have been too conditioned by Production Code features and television.

The ending has been compared to Sam Peckinpah's THE WILD BUNCH and Don Siegel's DIRTY HARRY, and not without cause. However, try to imagine yourself as a member of the original theatrical release audience in 1932. There would have been very little to prepare you for it, apart from DOORWAY TO HELL, LITTLE CAESAR, PUBLIC ENEMY, and SCARFACE. The difference here is that the story is told from the point of view of the men in law enforcement. It focuses on something that was common knowledge at the time, that prohibition had corrupted law enforcement far beyond the scope of anything the public had ever known.

The remedy for corruption that this film prescribes is very strong medicine indeed. You may not like it, but I defy you not to think about it for a long time after you've seen it.