WHY DID WARNER BROTHERS MAKE A CYCLE OF GANGSTER FILMS IN

The late 1800's and early 1900's was a very important period of growth in the United States, economically, industrially and technologically. This period was known as the 'progressive era', partly because of the technological advances and also because of the rapid growth in population. During the first fifteen years of the twentieth century, thirteen million immigrants arrived in the US, leading to one third of the population being foreign or of direct foreign descendance (www.usonline.com/gov/history).

This spell of growth and development was reflected by the film industry. Thomas Edison's kinetograph, unveiled in 1891, was the first contraption capable of exhibiting a moving image. By the turn of the century purpose built exhibition outlets had emerged

In summary, from 1930 on, Warner Bros. released gangster film after gangster film because they had discovered a very rewarding system, where the films they produced were cheap, quick, (The Public Enemy took only sixteen days to film, at a cost of only $151,000) easy to produce 'and the commercial success of these films determined studio policy throughout the rest of the decade. Gangster films, it was clear, made money'. (Cook, 1999, p 21). They made money because they were enormously popular with the 'depressed' working class masses. This popularity led to strong criticism, from the ruling upper classes, who felt that the films were immoral, socially harmful and could potentially encourage people to indulge in criminal activities. The influence of upper classes eventually told as in 1935, after years of pressure, gangster films per-say, were outlawed.

By the beginning of the thirties, the major studios had each developed their own 'studio style'. 'MGM went in for large-budget costume drama and later, musicals and Paramount had a taste for raciness and decadence' (Cook, 1999, p 20). While these studios were producing fantastical, escapist, romances and big budget musicals, Warner Bros. decided to focus some of their efforts on stories of a real-life nature. They concentrated on bleak narratives that tackled issues that were affecting the 'every-man' during this period of depression.

The ruling elite were fiercely afraid of the gangsters depicted in these films, and were equally concerned that the glamourous portrayal of the illicit lifestyle, could encourage an increase in gang related felonies.

Despite most of the leading characters of these films being murderers, racketeers, and generally unsavoury citizens, they were still often idolised as 'heros' or 'antiheroes'. Many of the public considered Prohibition unfair, and the gangsters were seen as 'Robin Hood' type characters, rebelling against unjust authority. And it was this sympathy and admiration that they received, that led to this film movement obtaining major criticism and facing censorship problems. The issue of censorship in cinema was addressed as early as 1915, when an Ohio court passed a motion denying 'the cinematic movement' the use of The First Amendment's right to free speech.

In 1935, following a sustained increase in pressure from, the Catholic Legion of Decency and WASP, the production code administration (PCA) decided to demonstrate it took the subject seriously and outlawed the production of any gangster films. This was a blow for Warner Bros. and to the other studios that were producing gang based films. However, the newly installed law only prevented studios from producing films where gangsters were the main characters, it did not outlaw the use of the gangster altogether. This led to studios switching emphasis, in some cases from the life of the gangster, to police's efforts to apprehend him. Another of the new conditions was that, ultimately, the police must prevail and the gangster be defeated. Studios found ways round the new restrictions, and the tide of gangster films continued. In some cases stars switched roles and became the law enforcers. Perhaps most noticeably was, Cagney as an FBI agent in G-Men (1935, William Keighley, Warner Bros.), who displayed many similarities to the gangster roles which made him famous. The Roaring Twenties (1939, Raoul Walsh, Warner Bros.) managed to evade the code by telling a historical account of gang-life, from a former time period. The gangster cinematic cycle continued into the early forties, but was then gradually replaced by Film Noir which borrowed some of the conventions from its predecessor, principally, the general depiction of a troubled, bleak society, and the focus on unsavoury characters and criminal activity.

Some topics in this essay:
Warner Bros, Volstead Act, Enemy Scarface, Anglo-Saxon Protestants, Warner Brothers, Legion Decency', Public Enemy, Thomas Edison's, Little Caesar, Wall Street, warner bros, gangster films, slocum 2001, warner brothers, cook 1999, little caesar, cook 1999 20, public enemy, film production, studios producing, 1999 20, slocum 2001 120, warner bros released, 1930 warner bros, release little caesar,