Just perfect...

There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

And it delivered! Peter Falk as a contract mob killer plays his role to perfection, and is reason alone to watch this movie.First is the very surprising brutality on display. The violence doesn't need blood and gore to be both horrific and convincing. The direction of these scenes is also very brave. There isn't any stylization or glorification - just rapid action that surprises the viewer as much as the victims. Obviously all part of the performance, but you get my point.Rarely does a villain so clearly evil remain interesting throughout a film, but there is something to Falk's performance that is constantly fascinating. His look, the way he carries himself, and the constant self-serving, unapologetic dialog all come together to define a deeply disturbed criminal. He's also completely egotistical and self centered, and often questions those around him who don't acquiesce to his singular world view. It is an absolute clinic on how to successfully play an iconic villain, and it wouldn't surprise me if actors like Joe Pesci studied this movie in preparation for similar roles. There's an ease and comfort level to every moment he's on camera, and one wonders where the actor begins and the character ends.It is quite possible Peter didn't want to play characters like this moving on, but it is a shame. I always been a fan of his presence in anything, but watching this movie, I wonder what other dark roles he could have wowed audiences.What about the movie itself? It's not bad. There are very dated montage sequences with a voiceover that fill major gaps in the plot, and only one or two other performances come close to Falk's. There are some priceless exchanges of dialog between characters though - any time anyone stands up to Falk, and the inevitable explosive reactions are wildly entertaining. The movie is built on a historical facts, and this film represents an interesting era of killers for hire in the world of organized crime.I absolutely loved the look of this movie. The black and white film stock seems perfect for the content, and never was I upset with any camera placement or move - which speaks to great direction, and a camera man who understood the content and never gets in the way of performances or story.My appreciation exists between pretty narrow margins, but I can't stress enough: if your a fan of crime drama's, villainous performances or Peter Falk - this is an absolute must watch.completely satisfied 7 out of 10

Film editor Ralph Rosenblum is obviously a disciple of Sergei Eisenstein. Certainly, Eisenstein's method of montage is very appropriately applied here – as is Gayne Rescher's bleak black-and-white CinemaScope photography. This documentary was actually based on the autobiography by Burton Turkus (played by Henry Morgan in the movie). Alas, the direction by Burt Balaban and Stuart Rosenberg is often over-reverential towards its original material. In fact, the movie is so weighed down with talk that the pace often slows to the speed of a snail. Fortunately, some persuasive acting is contributed by David J. Stewart and his glum henchman, Joseph Bernard. I also enjoyed Morey Amsterdam's bit. The film also supposedly "introduces" Sarah Vaughan who actually made her movie debut back in 1951 in "Disc Jockey". She sings a couple of songs. One actor we could do without, however, is Stuart Whitman whose performance is not only unconvincing but painfully tedious. May Britt's acting also disappoints, but at least she is easy on the eyes! As for Frank DeVol's music score this also is well below his usual high standard.

I remember watching this movie on TV with my father in the mid-60s when I was about 10 years old.When Peter Falk was on the screen, my father said that when he was about my age (in the early 1930s), he used to set pins in a bowling alley in Brooklyn, and the real Abe Reles bowled there nearly every day.I recall what a mad dog that Falk portrayed and how it chilled me that my dad set pins for him.I will be on the lookout for this movie again, so I can piece it all back together again.

An uneasy mix of fact, fiction and melodrama that purports to explain and expose the rise of organised crime in America. Real names are used for those that had - at that point in time (1960) - died.Hollywood's relationship with the mob is an interesting one. Not just the host of obvious stories that could be turned in to easy box office or TV shows, but also the way the mob was used by the Hollywood studios to get what they wanted. Which was usually getting a film made with as few problems as possible. One of the ways the "Cali Crew" earned a few extra dollars was controlling extras (sometimes through crooked unions) - because without extras no film can be made.The fact that they put money in gangsters pockets makes any condemnation rather dubious.Falk seems to represent a whole group of (real life) mad killers who did the dirty work for the big bosses. Morality to one side, these mad killers built the mob by wiping out those awkward souls that didn't want to play ball and to prove they meant business.Ironically Falk (in his debut role!) has a certain charisma that doesn't really fit the role totally and this weakens him as a gangster/killer who simply "takes what he wants" - and that includes women! The film starts well enough and involves the fairly common theme of the innocent (or the more innocent) being dragged in because of debt or social situation. Of headline interest, David J Stewart plays Lepke a gangster that gets double crossed by the authorities (or his own side if you want to believe that version of history) and gets the electric chair.This isn't a spoiler because this is a side plot. Indeed several of the side-plots have their own film - Lepke (with Tony Curtis) being the most obvious.While just about keeping ahead of cheap melodrama and cliché the film has too much baggage. The most heavy being the portrayal of the police as honest as the day is long (oh yeah!) There is also a tragic romance (involving May Britt - who later married Sammy Davis Junior) which seems to take over the production at the half way point.By the 1960's America had had enough of rackets and petty criminals that wanted to pick everyone's pockets. While the mob carry on today, the harsh light of publicity has made their job harder - you can't run secret societies when everyone knows about them. This film makes a statement that these people are no longer welcome and "something must be done." Because of this there is no real grand climax - the film just ends at a point of minor poetic justice.