Born Reckless

It's a gangster film! It's a war picture! It's a family drama! It's a story of unrequited love! It's a musical! It's a complete mess! It's not sci-fi or horror, but then Lon Chaney had just died and Fox didn't have Bela Lugosi under contract! But I digress.

Louie Beretti (Edmund Lowe) is working a safe cracking job with his gang in the middle of a parade (at night???), when a cop gets suspicious about the car waiting for them, and they have to abort the robbery. They manage to get away, but later Beretti and two of his partners in the job are nabbed by the police and given the choice of either going to war (WWI is in progress) or going to trial. They choose the former. Only Beretti returns alive, and opens a successful and classy speak-easy, which the police obviously know about because they bring it up to him as something positive that he has going on in his life (???). However, he gets not even one prohibition era raid. But you can take the man out of the mob, but it's not so easy to take the mob out of the man.

This was an early sound effort for John Ford, and, like I said, what a mess! John Ford gets better with sound, and quickly, so this is just Exhibit A of how good directors, in the face of the new technology, seemed to forget everything they knew about the art of motion picture making.

Edmund Lowe makes a brave effort, and I really like most of the films I've seen him in, but his bravery is not enough. For one, he's got a sister and parents who speak with an obvious Italian accent, but he sounds like he's from Brooklyn. When he's in the army in France everybody in his company sounds like they are from Brooklyn. Did nobody outside of New York City enlist in WWI?

As for the criminal gang he runs with, they all are so anonymous. They are all so non-descript looking and sounding I really couldn't tell one from another and that muddles the plot. Catherine Dale Owen, as the sister of one of Beretti's friends in the army who doesn't come home, is given very little to do. I guess it's a tribute to Lowe's acting that I can figure out that she's the classy girl who got away - She married someone else. Because I for sure couldn't figure it out from the dialogue or the situations.

What's good about it? For once, Fox made good use of contract player Warren Hymer as "Big Shot", head of the gang. Also, there's Lee Tracy in only his second credited role as a reporter - his go-to persona. He's there to make wry commentary on the various situations, and he does a good job of it.

If you are a Fox completist, or a student of early sound, or you just like Lee Tracy this might be worth your time.

In his long career John Ford shared directorial credit in two other films, Mister Roberts and Young Cassidy. Both were considerably better than Born Reckless. Someone named Andrew Bennison who was mostly a screenwriter was the co-director, presumably to help Ford over the bumps of the new sound media.

I saw and reviewed Ford's film, The Black Watch some months ago and he could have used the help. By the time Arrowsmith and Up The River were in theaters, I think John Ford was used to the sound media.

Except for The Whole Town's Talking possibly, I'm not sure if John Ford ever directed anything else that could remotely be called a gangster film. Our hero protagonist here is Edmund Lowe who after being caught along with some other of his friends in a jewelry heist is given the choice by a district attorney to enlist in the army or stand trial. He and his friends are local heroes in their neighborhood and the District Attorney is running for judge. Lowe and company take the offer.

By the way, Roy Stewart as the DA is another type that Ford would use over and over in films, the self satisfied bloviating blowhard who was usually in a position of great responsibility and often misused it. Coming to mind immediately with Stewart as the DA is banker Gatewood in Stagecoach who was so memorably played by Berton Churchill.

The story than goes to very familiar ground for Ford in the military. This is the best part of the film by far and absolutely pure John Ford. All the rough house style comedy that you saw in his later military setting pictures is right here. You'll see Ford regulars Jack Pennick and Ward Bond here.

Back in civilian Lowe sets himself if not as an outright gangster, he becomes a club owner, aka runs a speakeasy which is not quite condoned by polite society. Ford has a great old time ribbing Prohibition, still in affect in 1930. On a more serious note like Al Pacino, his friends are determined to drag him right back in again.

The version I saw of Born Reckless had some footage left out which left some holes in the film so part of its problems come from that. The rest might very well be the result of Ford being forced to share director credit with someone not anywhere close to his talents. It's not a bad film, but not real worthy of what we would expect from John Ford.

This is the dangerous part of not worrying too much about the pieces that feed into your ending. Yes, everything in the ending was set up, but the first bulk of the film is so overstuffed, unfocused, and downright dull that the fact that the ending is a fulfillment of the rest of the story ends up not meaning all that much. The story was simply not that interesting to begin with. This is an increasingly rare misstep in Ford's burgeoning career.

Born Reckless tells the story of Louis Beretti (Edmund Lowe), a low-level hood in his little corner of New York City. He and his friends run a small time racket, mostly trying to rob jewelry stores. I will say one thing about this film: it's opening shot is great, just absolutely great. It's a tracking shot that follows a truck full of soldiers heading off to join in the fight in Europe singing "Over There", the perennial soldierly anthem of World War I, continuing forward after the truck turns to the right, and we see the lookout man in front of the jewelry store. This is strong, economical, and visual filmmaking and storytelling that's creating a stark impression of the contrast between the young men going off to war and the young men staying behind to commit crimes.

The heist gets aborted when their wheelman attracts too much attention, and they get away safe. Louis heads home where his immigrant mother and father, speaking in broken English with Italian accents, welcome him home with open arms while his kid sister, Rosa (Marguerite Churchill) is hosting a young man in the other room. The young man is hoping to marry Rosa, and Louis needs to take him to his friends to size him up, much to the dismay of one of his gang who had had sights on Rosa. The police pick Louis and some of his gang up, though, and in a move that seems like only could happen in a movie, the judge sends Louis to fight on the front lines of the war, keeping any charges in limbo until he returns.

The movie then becomes a World War I soldiering movie, complete with an introduction to the loosest and most information start to basic training I've ever seen, baseball in France, and a hurried battle scene that's more a collection of moments than anything. And before you know it, we're back to New York.

This movie really does take on way too much. I thought the film was going to stay in France for the bulk of the film when it came up. It made sense. It would be the personal journey of a young, listless, and criminal man learning duty and honor in the service of his country, but it's over before we get a sense of much of anything.

Louis comes back, falls for the sister of a friend he made back in France but she's due to marry someone else. He ends up running a huge nightclub somehow while his old gang kind of just remain in the old neighborhood. There's a kidnapping plot introduced with about twenty minutes left, an assassination, and the ending really does use all the elements that came before. However, none of that matters because by the halfway point I was just bored by what I was watching.

Nothing was connecting. We just kept jumping from one storyline to another. It never felt like we were following one man on a journey with an emotional core. It was just a series of scene strung together and cut down to the bone. So, the mechanics of the story are there, but the emotional hook is missing.

Born Reckless is more of what I expected from this era of Ford when I started. There's a technical polish obviously present in terms of the production, but ultimately it's a poorly written and rushed affair that doesn't really highlight Ford's strengths all that well. This is a disappointment considering the strength of the films that have come before it, warts and all. This is mostly just warts.

Better than earlier Ford's but still bad. Flat with so many wasted opportunities to make it better. The plot was reused several times in movies to come and nearly all were vastly superior.

How much of this film was directed by Andrew Bennison and how much by John Ford is your guess. All I know is that with Ford at the helm, I sure expected more from this very flat film.

"Born Reckless" is a gangster film with rather odd casting. Edmund Lowe stars in this film and frankly he didn't seem at all the gangster type. Part of this might be because I've only seen Lowe in about a dozen films (and he made over a hundred) and none of them ha him playing anything even closely resembling a criminal. Usually, he played very sophisticated and cultured sorts of men and with his lovely diction it just felt odd to have him hanging out with the sorts of Warren Hymer in the film--Hymer usually playing idiots or thugs. So, from the onset I had trouble accepting Lowe in the film--although I like him as an actor.

The other problem I noticed is that the film didn't seem sure whether or not to make Lowe a bad guy or a good guy. At the beginning he seemed kind of bad--after all, he was involved in an armed robbery. then, however, only minutes later he seemed like a swell fella when he met his sister's new boyfriend. And, when the police brought him in because of the robbery, he agreed to serve in WWI in order to avoid prison--and he served with distinction. Later, after he got out, he was not the most law-abiding of citizens (opening a speakeasy), but he also had a very, very moral code--one you'd certainly not expect from the owner of a speakeasy!! As a result, the film was muddled despite having some very interesting elements and a dandy violent finale.

With all the great gangster films of the early 30s, my attitude is that you should see all of them first! With wonderful films like "Scarface", "Littel Caesar" and "Public Enemy" (among others), why mess with this mediocre and poorly written film?