Antonius Block This is a film that is for the most part mundane, tedious, and pretentious, and the only reason to watch it is to see the Jean Harlow, who is anything but those things.Walter Huston plays a police officer who is Ivory Soap pure, and who vows to clean up the city after he's promoted to chief of police. Unfortunately, a major problem with the film is there is no effective counterbalance to his role. There are 'bad guys' of course, and a few requisite chase and shootout scenes, but their presence is tepid, and there certainly is no 'beast of the city' that the title would suggest.Harlow, on the other hand, is sensational in the roll of the gangsters' moll who seduces the brother of Huston's character, who is also a cop. The scenes of her reclining back on a chaise lounge, and later swaying her body in an eastern style dance are absolutely electric. In a prelude to 'The Red-Headed Woman' which would appear later in the same year, when he grabs her by the arm and says "You don't like to be hurt, do ya?", she slowly drawls, "Oh I don't know … it's kinda fun sometimes if it's done in the right spirit." Unfortunately, that's just about it. There's police procedure, we see Huston at home, we see him lecturing fellow officers (zzzz), and we have a typical courtroom trial near the end. Oh, if you're a Mickey Rooney fan, you may like to see him in a small part at age 11; that was somewhat cute.I won't spoil the ending but have to say it's horrible, not just because of what happens, but because of how illogical and inconsistent it is. It's also highly melodramatic, and a bookend to the beginning of the film, which has a quote from President Herbert Hoover extolling the virtues of the police and their need for better support. If you think about the actions of the police in the film however, you may find yourself a little puzzled. It's just a bad movie with one bright spot, Harlow.

runamokprods This story of a tough cop turned chief of police is an uneven mix of entertaining and very clunky moments. Walter Huston did a lot of very good work in his career, but here, as the 'hero' (almost an anti-hero), he's pretty flat and one note. It's interesting in theory to see a cop in a film this old who's bends the law to get 'justice', but the lack of electricity in the writing and the performance make a number of his scenes a bit of a chore to sit through. Also, the much discussed climatic gunfight, while impressively violent for the day, is also pretty silly on anything but a symbolic level. I find it hard to believe a real gunfight in the 1930s (or ANY time) could have looked anything like this. On the plus side, Jean Harlow is a lot of pre-code fun in a supporting role as a gun moll, seducing the chief's cop brother in an extended scene that's both sexy and funny. When Wallace Ford as the brother asks her 'you don't like to be hurt, do you' after he accidentally grabs her too hard, she comes back with "I don't know, it can be fun if it's done in the right spirit", said with a gleam in her eye hot enough to melt an ice cube at the north pole. There's also some very interesting and evocative photography sprinkled through the film. Moving the huge blimped cameras was never easy in these early sound films, but there are some nice tracking shots here, along with good use of shadows. That said, there are many better films from this era than MGM's awkward attempt to get into Warner's patented cops and robbers territory, but with a almost proto-fascist, slant. But if you're interested in pre-code films, and the subject matter, you could also do worse for a piece of film and period history.

dougdoepke 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.

MartinHafer This is an exciting Pre-Code cop film from MGM. When I say "Pre-Code", I am indicating that it was made just before the adoption of the Hollywood Production Code that was intended to clean up movies and eliminate sex, violence and other adult-only content in films. Because of this, the film is much more violent than films made in the mid-30s and later. It also features a lot of seamy dialog and content. A few examples of these taboos that were in some Pre-Code films would include:Police radio reports of "a nude woman on the corner of Elm and Berry" and an "indecent exposure".Memorable lines such as "the back of his head was blown out" and referring to the coroner's vehicle as "the meat wagon".These sleazy elements actually helped make the movie more exciting and seem more like a real police story. And it was exciting throughout until a very, very disappointing and silly ending. Yes, this ending WAS violent and satisfying on a baser level, but it just made no sense at all. This helped to make this movie a good time-passer with some sleazy elements, but not much more. Exciting but not all that satisfying.In addition to all the excitement, look for a very young and pretty adorable Mickey Rooney as Walter Huston's son.