Gangster contro gangster

With His "Mad Dog" Face a Natural for the Titular Gangster, Actor John David Chandler Never was Offered a Lead-Role Again (quite odd),

but Did Have a Successful Career Playing Criminals and Especially the Mentally-Ill...He is an Actor that Leaves an Impression.

While the Movie does Feature Many Actors who would Become Well-Known, such as...Jerry Orbach, Telly Savalas, Vincent Gardenia, and an Unaccredited Gene Hackman...

Chandler Still Dominates the Movie, Propped Up by the Support, the Unforgettable Title, and an Overall Violent, Lurid, and a Code-Defying Sociopathic Tone,

it is Chandler that Steals the Spotlight Whenever He is On Screen.

It's a Fantastic First-Film in a Career Spanned to 1998 with a Guest-Spot on "Deep Space Nine".

He Became a Reliable Force of Evil that Enhanced Many Movies & TV and Classically for a Character-Actor, when He Appeared, it's..."Oh Yea That Guy".... What's His Name?

This is Part of the "Untouchables" Run-Off from the Late 50's, Early 60's when these Low-Budget "B" Movies were Raging. There were Dozens.

This One was Hard-to-Find and was Sleeping Waiting to be Discovered.

Reminds of a "Roger Corman" Movie and Just as Good.

Worth a Watch.

If you took a blender and added a little bit Steve Buscemi, Arnold Stang and Nicolas Cage from "Vampire's Kiss," you'd get the whiny, bug-eyed bad acting from John Chandler in his first and only lead role.

Everyone else in the cast, including Savalas and Orbach were fine, but Chandler's performance was absurd, comical, and sort've fun to watch in a guilty pleasured way.

Not a bad Ed Wood/Corman-like film to watch and make fun of, so a few stars for the laughs.

As any movie buff knows, the early sixties was the period for gangster biographies, mafia films such as MURDER INC, PORTRAIT OF A MOBSTER, RISE AND FALL OF LEGS DIAMOND, PAY OR DIE, THE BLACK HAND, KING OF THE ROARING TWENTIES, GEORGE RAFT STORY, THE PURPLE GANG.... And of course this one. Useless to say that John Davis Chandler gives here his best performance as the evil lead. Later in his career, he will never have another lead role, at least as far as I know, only supporting villains - MAJOR DUNDEE, BARQUERO, ONCE A THIEF.... This movie seems to be not widely known, such a shame. He is terrific here. Just terrific. His face, so disturbing face is unforgettable. Is is also his first film, and what a shame that he never played in THE UNTOUCHABLES series, I am sure Desilu productions would have found a supporting villain character for him.

My favorite scene is where the old man tells Coll (Chandler) to go threaten somebody else because the old man doesn't even look at "girls in summer dresses" any longer. Good line-- so, take that, tough guy! Too bad the rest of the movie looks like it was filmed in somebody's garage. It's a "Thalia" production and not surprisingly plays like a quickie meant to cash in on TV's top-rated Untouchables. This was the early 1960's, and the public was fascinated with 20's style careening cars and Tommy gun splatters. So why not a "Mad Dog" Coll, to go along with Capone, Nitti, and the rest of the gangland icons. Thalia may have been a cheap outfit, but they knew where the bucks were.

Chandler sure tries—he's seen all the old Warner Bros. classics. Then too, with his over- sized teeth and heavy-lidded eyes, no one would confuse him with Cary Grant. More importantly, he hits all the right poses and sprays the chopper with appropriate bloodlust delight. The trouble is he's also got zero charisma. So, unlike a Cagney or Bogart, his Mad Dog comes across as little more than a dislikable tough guy that nobody cries for in the end. No wonder Chandler's future lay in character acting. But what's up with Broadway actor Jerry Orbach (Joe) who performs like he wandered onto the wrong set. He looks confused throughout. Maybe he's waiting for clues from director Balaban. If so, he never gets them, resulting in several near-painful scenes. Anyway, the movie amounts to a C-grade version of the gangland craze, but with one key distinction. It may be the only film on record where just about all the supporting cast is now better known than the lead.

I see no reason for whining about being inaccurate. Has anyone seen a movie lately that was accurate? For that matter has anyone seen a news broadcast that is accurate? I found this inaccurate movie very entertaining. I only gave it a 7 because i saw the movie many years ago and maybe it wasn't quite as good as i thought it was then. probably not, but i did switch brands of cigarettes to chesterfield kings for about 6 months, i don't guess i have to mention non-filtered as i don't believe any chesterfield cigarettes were filtered at the time. and yes, i do find stupid movies entertaining, i saw another about a blue butterfly, many years later, cant remember the name of it and have looked for it in vain. i have not seen many movies where the actor actually looked like the person he was portraying unless perhaps it was abraham lincoln. i have seen various actors portray mad dog, and the one in this movie is the closest my mind could picture as looking like him. who really cares anyway. its not like you have to identify him in court.