I was waiting to see if there would be any movie on this list that I wouldn't like. Well, here is the first. White Heat, although revered as one of the best gangster/prison films, is a jumble of puzzle pieces that take too long to fit together and when they finally do don't quite have the spark that the twists and turns of the plot could ultimately produce. For it's time, I could see how White Heat would impress any audience. Warner Bros. didn't skimp on expense, creating complicated sets and "high-tech" props (which are almost comical to see in this day). The film flaunted modernity in a post-war era, and revived the gangster flick and James Cagney's image as a true "tough-guy". Examining each piece of the film's puzzle, I can see how great this film could be - it's got melodrama, stark violence, undercover schemes and psychological twists (including Cagney's unhealthy attachment to his mother) - but for some reason it didn't do it for me. It didn't quite build the way I think it could have, and I was left feeling disappointed.
What I Like Best
James Cagney is quite extraordinary as the cruel, yet vulnerable and slightly insane head gangster. When I look at him, however, I don't automatically think "tough-guy". He looks more like a Laurel & Hardy-type character - with a boyish face, naughty grin and amusingly-arched eyebrows. In fact, he initially started his showbiz career as a dancer in vaudeville acts. Once he furrows his brow, however, he does become an intimidating figure. It is this mix of comedy and toughness that enables Cagney to create a complex and believable character in White Heat. To see him switch from killing a man with no remorse, to snuggling up to his mommy in tears because his little head hurts is surprisingly believable and inspiring.
The "high-tech" props were also pretty amusing. The police communicate with each other on enormous phones in their patrol cars, and use some kind of oscillating radio device that sits on top of the car and connects to huge DJ-like earphones. I am aware that this was most likely not meant to be humorous to the audience. And at the time, I'm sure it was quite extraordinary. But watching it in 2010, it's a sight to see. They are so serious in their use of the equipment, and exude an air of cleverness that I had to laugh at how charming it all was.
What I Didn't Like
This is a very complicated movie. A lot happens. And the complexity of the storyline is ambitious and interesting - with a lot of twists and undercover drama. But it dragged.
The main reason is the editing. Many of the dialogue scenes had a tennis-match type of back and forth which made the pace of the scene too rhythmic, detracting from the emotional intensity and ultimately slowing down the entire film. The action scenes were great - great editing. But I was never quite able to catch up with the intensity of those scenes because they were broken up with stilted dialogue scenes. And by the end - by that famous "Top of the world", fire-exploding scene - I was bored, not thrilled. Both happy and sad that the movie was ending. Because I really saw the potential for it to be a great film, but also wanted to go to sleep.
Would I Recommend It?
I'm iffy on this one. It is a classic. And James Cagney is amazing. It is certainly worth a watch for how ambitious the story and production is, and for Cagney's performance. But I was bored.
Raoul Walsh: director
Ivan Goff, Ben Roberts: writers
James Cagney, Virginia Mayo, Edmond O'Brien, Margaret Wycherly : cast
114m: running time
english: language
