Had totally forgotten Boris Karloff shows up following an ear-shattering montage of drive-by killings. Paul Muni absolutely dwarfs every performance in the picture, it's no surprise that Frankenstein's monster gets shafted. Muni's Tony remains scarily contemporary. This particular low-life will always exist, adaptable to all forms of modernism. He engulfs the movie with a haze of timelessness and status as a classic.

One of the most violent movies ever made. Every other scene is someone getting shot.

There are some very clever moments, however. The secretary character is what the Coens dream of, and the opening camera shot is ages ahead of its time.

This movie doesn't just use violence as a gimmick; it's a genuinely good film, even 81 years after it was made.

Because I'm already missing Boardwalk Empire.

Scarface is now eighty years old, yet surprisingly, it still packs a mean punch, like an enforcer after a bad debt. Several performances and set pieces refuse to date, largely because the film was produced with the intention of reflecting reality.

It is in fact perhaps a little sad that this doesn't actually feel old, as it means that the crime, problems and culture that Scarface was exploring is still around and relevant today.

Groundbreaking and iconic, Scarface set the mould for every other gangster film made since. I'm not just talking those in the immediate aftermath, Scorsese, De Palma, Leone, Coppola, Tarantino etc all owe a debt to Howard Hawks.

Look out for Boris Karloff too.

This is about as classic as early-sound Hollywood gets.

The rise-and-fall pioneering gangster picture arrived with shatteringly frank grit and casually off-the-cuff violence for 1932, sandwiched between a stunning opening tracking shot and a brilliant ending.

The acting was hokey with exception of Karloff, but the unrelenting evil and death-spitting gun violence would change the movies forever.

You don't realize how overblown the De Palma film is until you see the leaner original. Paul Muni is fantastic here.

A decent gangster film. Not quite as fun as the pulpy De Palma film, but still a strong early talkie, with a solid performance from Paul Muni.

I was hoping this would be better than the modern version, which I dislike intensely. And it is. But it is still not very good, I’m afraid. I think Paul Muni might be a tad overrated, and the dialogue is, well…

Tony Camonte: I’m not hungry. Except for you. You got something I like.
Poppy: Yeah. I’m nice with a lot of dressing.

Laaaame, even for the 1930’s. Scratch that, especially for the 1930’s. But perhaps I’m just bitter because George Raft is billed and I like his face and then he was only in it for 20 seconds.

Another really solid performance from Muni, and this film definitely has the most distinctive directorial flourishes of the Gangster Film Cycle. Still, you never quite empathize with Tony the way you do with Tommy in The Public Enemy, and a number of sequences are blatantly preachy. Of particular note is one scene where the policeman charged with fighting crime speaks directly to the camera, telling those in the room (and in a not so subtle metaphor the audience itself) to do whatever it takes to fight organized crime. The need to satisfy censors is definitely more apparent here than in the other films, but what isn't preachy is fun.

Why It’s Essential — It depicts a grim view of gang life while serving as a precursor to the wildly successful genre of crime films to come.

Why You’ll Want to Skip It — If you don’t like the genre, there’s little reason to visit its early years.

One of the most violent movies ever made. Every other scene is someone getting shot.

There are some very clever moments, however. The secretary character is what the Coens dream of, and the opening camera shot is ages ahead of its time.

This movie doesn't just use violence as a gimmick; it's a genuinely good film, even 81 years after it was made.

This is the original Scarface, made in 1932, back when bad guys were required to get their comeuppance as part of the Hays Code and these types of violent films had to be presented with a message. This message was an interesting one, one that seemed eerily timely 80 years later. The scrolling text at the beginning speaks to the epidemic of violence in the country and implores the government to do something about it. The titular character is obsessed with machine gun and fire power. In that respect, I found watching this movie worthwhile. When it comes to gangster films of the period, I prefer White Heat mostly because I am a Jimmy Cagney fan, but Paul Muni is a compelling lead and this story certainly kept me invested. Gangster movies have never been my thing though, so it isn’t surprising that I don’t really feel like I need to see this one again in my lifetime.