Best Film Discovery for January---I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (1932)

New for 2014---the "Best Film Discovery of the Month" series, in which I will highlight the best "new to me" film I watch each month.  For January, that film is 1932's I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang, starring Paul Muni and featuring Glenda Farrell and Helen Vinson in supporting roles. Not only is this pre-code drama the best "new to me" film I saw in January, it is also my first 5-star film "discovery" of the year.  Based on Robert Elliott Burns's autobiography, I Am a Fugitive from a Georgia Chain Gang, this Mervyn LeRoy film received three Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture and Best Actor for Mr. Muni.

After being convicted of a crime he did not commit, WWI veteran James Allen is sentenced to 10 years of hard labor on a Southern chain gang.  When he is unable to cope another minute with the horrid conditions and the brutality of the guards, James convinces another inmate to break his chains, then he sets out on the run.

Escaping to Chicago, James changes his name to Allen James and eventually becomes a successful, respected businessman.  When his landlady (Glenda Farrell) discovers his past, she blackmails him into marrying her; it's a union void of love, however, and a few years later, in a fit of jealousy because Allen/James has fallen in love with another woman (Helen Vinson), the wicked woman turns him in to the authorities.

Although Allen/James had not committed any crime and has been a model citizen for years, he is returned to the chain gang, with the promise that his sentence will be for a period of only 90 days. Because he had spoken out about the inhumanity of the chain gangs, however, the "establishment" has no intention of honoring that promise, and once again, the man is forced to break his chains and live a life on the run.  How everything plays out is the balance of the film.



I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang is a masterpiece of a film.  It's gritty, meaty, powerful, deeply troubling and features an absolutely brilliant performance by Paul Muni...and the final line of the film is about as haunting an ending line as there ever was.

This film is out on DVD; however, I believe it is only available as part of the Controversial Classics Collection, which is a spendy $79.98.  Adding to the nearly cost-prohibitive price, TCM doesn't seem to air Chain Gang very often, so it might not be an easy film to catch.  Keep your eye out for it, though, as it is a spectacular must-see.

Happy viewing!!

I Want to Live (5 stars)

It was March 9, 1953 that the brutal, cold-blooded killing of Mabel Monahan took place in Burbank, California.  A 64-year old widow, Mrs. Monahan was bludgeoned and strangled, then left in the hallway of her house, her body to be discovered by her gardener two days later.  The three people arrested and convicted of the murder were executed in California’s gas chamber a little more than two years later (June 3, 1955), and a story based on the life of the female member of that trio was brought to life not long afterwards (1958) in the film I Want to Live. (Of course, “Hollywood license” was taken, resulting in several situations being fictionalized and/or depicted in a way which was not how they actually happened.)

Directed by Robert Wise, and starring my #2 gal, Susan Hayward, in an Academy Award-winning performance, I Want to Live is a gritty, hard-hitting “discussion piece” kind of movie.  The film, which will more than likely leave you questioning Mrs. Graham’s guilt, was based on the newspaper articles of Pulitzer Prize-winning San Francisco Examiner reporter, Edward S. Montgomery, and the letters of Barbara Graham.

Good-time party girl, Barbara Ward (Susan Hayward), is living a fast and loose lifestyle when she is arrested on prostitution charges.  Now with a criminal record, Barbara gets in further trouble with the law when, despite knowing perjury is a felony, she agrees to provide a phony alibi for two men who want to beat a rap.  Convicted of perjury charges, Barbara serves a year’s time and is then put on probation for five years.  During her probation period, she marries a man named Henry Graham then gives birth to a little boy.  Henry Graham is a drug addict who cannot hold a job, which results in Barbara passing bad checks and, ultimately, breaking her parole.

Though married, Barbara keeps company with two men who are suspected of the recent murder of a Burbank widow; a sting operation is put into action, and the men and Barbara are arrested.  Completely hostile to authorities, Barbara refuses to confess or to cooperate with prosecutors, and when she is questioned by the press, her belligerent attitude begins the initial action of trying her in the court of public opinion.  With the headline “Bloody Babs, the Tiger Woman,” reporter Ed Montgomery writes that Barbara is “young, attractive, belligerent, immoral, and guilty as hell.” 

As the case goes to trial, Barbara is fingered by the others as the one who did the killing.  Though she claims she is innocent and that she wasn’t anywhere near Mabel Monahan’s home that evening, Barbara has no alibi, and in an effort to concoct one, she lies that she had been with a man at a hotel.  As it turns out, though, the man who offers to be her phony alibi is an undercover police officer intent on getting a confession from her.  When he threatens to walk out on her unless she admits to having been with the other men, she agrees that she was, and that confession is brought forward as evidence against her.  Even though Barbara claims that her “confession” was a lie due to fear of her alibi falling through, having done time for perjury in the past, she is, more than ever, thought to be a compulsive liar and, without question, guilty of the crime for which she is standing trial.

All three suspects are convicted and sentenced to death in the gas chamber at San Quentin.  Barbara moves to Death Row, and as the film plays out, Ed Montgomery begins to believe that she is innocent.  Feeling that the press created the climate which condemned her, he seeks to change the climate.  With hopes to have a lie detector test administered, a psychologist is called in, but it is all to no avail.  Barbara’s appeal is denied…execution is inevitable...the gas chamber is prepared.  In the end, the question remains…is Barbara Graham a murderer?  Yes, she is hard, belligerent, immoral, and unlikeable…but is she a murderer?  This film’s view is that she is not.

In all, I Want to Live received 6 Academy Award nominations, taking home the win in the Lead Actress category.  Without question, Miss Hayward deserved the Academy Award she won for her work in this film, for she played the hardened Mrs. Graham to absolute perfection.  Truly, there are not enough adjectives to describe the performance she gave . . . she was brilliant . . . awesome . . . sensational . . . terrific . . . completely stellar.  While I think Miss Hayward was an amazing actress who gave many superb performances, I believe I Want to Live is definitely her finest hour.  Adding to the fantastic acting in this film is the incredible score.  It is perfect and totally adds to the realism.  The death row and gas chamber scenes are powerful and haunting, especially as Barbara mentally prepares herself for the walk to her execution, only to receive a last-minute stay by the governor.  Those torturous moments are brought vividly to life by Miss Hayward.

For those who like meaty, hard-hitting, gritty dramas with completely magnificent acting, I Want to Live is an absolute must-see.  No matter whether you are a proponent of the death penalty or an opponent, or whether you believe Barbara Graham was, in fact, guilty, or whether you think she was wrongly convicted, you absolutely will not be disappointed with the caliber of this film.  It is truly outstanding!  I don't believe the film is out on DVD; however, it is available in its entirety on YouTube (in parts), so you could catch it there.

Happy viewing!!

Call Northside 777 (4 stars)

Based on a true story, Call Northside 777 is a 1948 drama directed by Henry Hathaway and starring James Stewart, with Richard Conte and Lee J. Cobb taking on supporting roles.  In honor of Mr. Conte's March 24th birthday, I took a break from the Garfield, Crawford, Brent, and Heflin films which have been occupying me this month and enjoyed a re-watch of this film.  I was then inspired to learn a bit about the actual case upon which the story is based.

With Prohibition in full force, violent gangster activity has taken over Chicago, and in December, 1932, the 8th police killing of the year takes place in a speakeasy in the Polish district. Fronting as a grocery store, the speakeasy is owned by Wanda Skutnik, who is talking with a police officer in her back room when two masked men enter, shoot the officer, then make a hasty exit.  Witnesses finger two unemployed men---Frank Wiecek (Richard Conte) and Tomek Zaleska, and very soon, the men are indicted and brought to trial.

Identified by Miss Skutnik as the men who entered her store, Wiecek and Zaleska receive convictions and sentences of 99 years.

Eleven years later, in October, 1944, a small advertisement appears in the Chicago newspaper.  Offering a $5,000 reward for information about the shooting of Officer Bundy, the tiny ad provides the contact phone number of Northside 777.  Curious as to who would be interested in an eleven year-old case which has already been solved, Chicago Times editor Brian Kelly (Lee J. Cobb) puts reporter Jim "Mac" McNeal (James Stewart) on the story.

Finding that the ad was placed by Tillie Wiecek---mother of the convicted Frank---McNeal pays her a visit.  Convinced her son could never have committed such a crime, Mrs. Wiecek has scrubbed floors all these years---saving every penny she could---so as to earn reward money which may provide new evidence in the case. Though Mac doesn't share the woman's belief in Frank's innocence, he nevertheless realizes he has just been provided with a great human interest story---which may well increase circulation; therefore, he writes a feature piece about Mrs. Wiecek's faith in her son.   As expected, the public response to the story is extremely positive, which causes Mac to continue pumping out articles about the case.

Eventually, after going to the penitentiary and meeting with Frank and doing a bit of investigation, Mac comes to believe that Wiecek truly is innocent.  He commits himself to pursuing one lead after another until Frank is exonerated.  How it all plays out is the balance of the film.

Call Northside 777 is a very interesting, exciting film----all the more so because it is based on actual events.  Rather than just a fictional man languishing in prison eleven years for a crime he didn't commit, this is the story of a very real man---a man who lost eleven years of his life...and who, but for the courage and dedication of a news reporter, may have lost dozens more years as well.  The acting in the movie is very good...very believable.

For more information about the real story upon which Call Northside 777 is based, HERE is a link to an interesting piece written by a Chicago Tribune reporter back in 2009.  He links to several other fascinating articles.  While the movie took liberties with the true story, the basic facts were not altered.

The film is out on DVD, so it should be easy to track down.  Additionally, it is on the TCM schedule for Sunday, April 8th, at 8:00 p.m. (ET).  It is also available on YouTube in several different parts.

Happy viewing!!

Dust Be My Destiny (5 stars)

Dust Be My Destiny, a 1939 romantic drama starring John Garfield and Priscilla Lane, is my absolute favorite John Garfield film.  It's rare that a Garfield film brings anyone to tears, but this one definitely does that to me, and in honor of Mr. Garfield's upcoming birthday, I decided a re-watch of this beloved film was in order.  (I've seen this film five times, I think, and it touches me every single time.)

After serving 16 months jail time for a crime he didn't commit, down-on-his-luck Joe Bell (John Garfield) is released from prison when the real criminal makes a confession.  Although Joe had told the truth at his trial, he wasn't believed, and now that he's free, he is angry and bitter and vows to look out for #1 from now on.

 Hopping a train with two teenage boys, Joe heads out of town; after two additional men jump the train at another location, a scuffle breaks out, alerting the railroad personnel to the men's presence.  Charged with vagrancy and disturbing the peace, Joe and the others are sentenced to 90 days labor at the county work farm.

While Joe is on barn duty, he makes the acquaintance of Mabel Alden (Priscilla Lane), the stepdaughter of the farm's superintendent.  Though their first meeting is anything but pleasant, eventually, Joe and Mabel fall in love, and for the first time in his life, Joe wants to put down some roots.

When Mabel's stepfather (Charlie) catches the two lovers kissing in the barn, he is enraged and attacks Mabel.  Defending Mabel, Joe fights with Charlie; after the altercation, Charlie falls to the ground unconscious and Joe and Mabel go on the run, even getting married at the first opportunity.

After hearing on the radio news that Charlie has died and that convict Joe Bell is being sought for his murder, Mabel urges Joe to give himself up and to explain what really happened.  Having told the truth and not been believed before, Joe has no intention of putting faith in the law again; therefore, they remain on the run.

Eventually, Mabel and Joe come to a town where they believe they can settle.  Feeling that Joe and Mabel are good, hardworking people, a kindhearted man gives them both jobs.  Though Joe is skeptical and mistrustful of everyone, he discovers an abundance of kind, caring people, and he begins to think that maybe, just maybe, things will work out for him and Mabel.  As they try to make a life, though, the past has its way of rearing its ugly head, and before long, the newly married couple may be forced to run again.

Will Joe and Mabel ever be able to stop running?  Will Joe be cleared of murdering Charlie?  Will Joe, who really is an honest man, remain honest?  Or will he be forced to use the gun he carries in his pocket?  These are the questions which play out in the balance of this touching film.



Dust Be My Destiny is a lovely film.  Seems strange to call a John Garfield film lovely, but it's true.  There are several very touching moments, especially as Joe discovers that there really are kind people out there, people who are willing to give him a chance.  Another especially touching scene (to me) is when Joe and Mabel argue and decide to split up.  As they both walk in opposite directions, both are continually looking back at the other, and, finally, Joe runs to Mabel.  It's rare in a 30's film for the man to be the one who comes running back, and it really touched me that he did.

In my opinion, John Garfield was a truly amazing actor---really one of the best and quite under-rated.  Always fantastic as the cynical, misunderstood man with a chip on his shoulder, Mr. Garfield is totally stellar in this role.  Priscilla Lane is wonderful too; in fact, this is just as much her film as it is Garfield's.   Dust Be My Destiny is my favorite of her films as well...though The Roaring Twenties is only a miniscule distance behind.

The chemistry between Garfield and Lane is great; of course, they had already worked together in Four Daughters and Daughters Courageous, so perhaps they were just comfortable with one another.  At any rate, they were wonderful together in this film.  The life and vulnerability they brought to their characters made me really care about both of them.  The supporting cast, which includes the always-delightful Alan Hale, is wonderful as well.

To my knowledge, this film is not out on DVD; however, it is on VHS, so perhaps you could track down a copy.  TCM airs it periodically (that's how I caught it), so perhaps it will be on their schedule again in the near future.  Definitely keep your eyes out for this one, especially if you are a John Garfield fan (as I am).

Happy viewing!!

Each Dawn I Die (5 stars)

Each Dawn I Die is another one of those amazing films from the year 1939.   A gritty prison drama, this film stars James Cagney and George Raft, with Jane Bryan and George Bancroft taking on supporting roles.  This is one of many films which I think showcases the absolute brilliance of Mr. Cagney.  Truly,  he was one incredibly fabulous actor...nearly always turning out an Oscar-worthy performance.  He shines brightly in this film...as does George Raft.  Ah, if only George Raft hadn't turned down some of the roles he turned down!!

Frank Ross (James Cagney), a newspaperman who vows to expose political corruption, breaks a story which reveals the great graft among the city's elected officials.  Though Jesse Hanley, who is running for governor, insists that a retraction be printed, Ross refuses, an act for which the hoodlums intend to make him pay dearly.  Knocking Frank unconscious, the thugs douse him in booze and then put him in a car, which they send careening into a high traffic area.  Three people are killed, and though Frank insists he was framed and was neither drunk nor driving the car, he is found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to 1-20 years in the penetentiary.

Entering prison, Frank is confident that his newspaper friends will be able to find evidence which proves his innocence; he is sure that his stay there won't be a long one.  However, things don't go as planned, and when months go by and Frank is no closer to proving his innocence than on day one, he begins to change.  Eventually, as he experiences the brutality of the guards, he begins to think and act like a convict.  His only hope is to throw in his lot with hardened criminal, Stacey (George Raft), a repeat offender with connections on the outside.

With Frank's help, Stacey is sure he can bust out, and after he has done so, he promises to track down those responsible for framing Frank.   But will Stacey, who doesn't care about or trust anyone, give a second thought to Frank's predicament after he has reached freedom?  Will Frank ever be exonerated?    Will those responsible for Frank's imprisonment ever be brought to justice?  Those are the questions that play out in this exciting prison drama.

Each Dawn I Die is a bold and exciting film, and the performances of both James Cagney and George Raft are spectacular.  I loved seeing these "bad boy gangster" actors together in a film; though Mr. Raft had appeared in a couple early 30's Cagney films, this one is the only one in which they shared the lead.  And, wow, what a team they were!!  Their brilliant performances are what take this film from 4 to 5 stars.  Jane Bryan, who portrayed Frank Ross's girlfriend, was quite good in her role as well.

As an aside, I learned from watching a James Cagney biography, that gangster roles were not his favorites; far and away, he preferred his song and dance movies (Yankee Doodle Dandy, Something to Sing About, The West Point Story, etc.) and viewed gangster films as simply a way to pay the bills.  Even though these roles weren't his favorite, though, he still gave them his all and was totally sensational in them.

Out on DVD, Each Dawn I Die should be very easy to track down.  James Cagney and George Raft fans will love it, I'm sure.

Happy viewing!!

The Defiant Ones (4 stars)

The Defiant Ones, from 1958, is an exciting racial/prison drama starring Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier.  Produced and directed by Stanley Kramer, this film was originally supposed to have Marlon Brando in the Tony Curtis role; however, according to what I learned from Robert Osborne, Mr. Poitier was Mr. Kramer's absolute first and only choice for the role of Noah Cullen.  Because Poitier had another commitment at the time, filming had to be delayed; by the time they were ready to begin shooting, Brando was unavailable, so the role went to Tony Curtis, who, I think, did a totally fantastic job.

A truckload of convicts is being transported to a work farm, where the prisoners will work as part of a chain gang.  Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier), a black man serving an 8-year prison sentence for assault and battery, and John Jackson (Tony Curtis), a white man serving a sentence for robbery, are shackled together.  Though the two men completely despise each other, the right arm of Cullen and the left arm of Jackson bind them together; when the truck they are riding in is involved in an accident, the two men make their escape. 

Try as they might, Cullen and Jackson are unable to break the chain binding them to one another; therefore, though each man would prefer to travel in a different direction, they have no choice but to compromise and work together.  Over and over again---as they navigate a fast-moving river, as they climb up from a deep pit, as a lynch mob comes at them, as the lawmen hunting them grow ever-nearer---the two men must put aside their racial differences and support one another.  Eventually, as the men grow to respect each other, a friendship is formed.

This is an amazingly acted film.  Both Sidney Poitier and Tony Curtis were wonderful in their roles; in fact, both men received a Best Actor Academy Award nomination for their work---a first nomination for each man.  It certainly seems to be that the loss of Marlon Brando was absolutely not a detriment to this film.  It worked beautifully with Tony Curtis in the white man role.

When the credits appear at the beginning of the film, both Curtis and Poitier's names are listed before the film title.  According to Robert Osborne's wonderfully informational snippets, this was the first film of Mr. Poitier's in which that happened.  And it happened at the request of Tony Curtis, who felt that Poitier's contribution to the film was just as great as his own.  Perhaps that seems like a no-brainer to us now; however, back in 1958, with the racial situation being far different, it was probably quite unexpected for Mr. Curtis to have made that request.  I'm glad he did, though, as he was correct---Sidney Poitier was just as much the star of the film as Tony Curtis was.

The Defiant Ones is really an amazing movie---well-acted, well-directed, and featuring the kind of bold storyline to which I tend to gravitate.  I definitely highly recommend it.  Although I'm not entirely certain the film is out on DVD, TCM will be airing it Friday, February 17th, at 2:30 p.m. (EST).

Happy viewing!!

Women's Prison (3 stars)

Women's Prison, from 1955, is a gritty prison drama starrng Ida Lupino, Jan Sterling, Howard Duff, Audrey Totter, and Phyllis Thaxter.  Similar to Caged, the 1950 film which showcased the amazing acting range of Eleanor Parker, Women's Prison explores the issue of sadistic supervisors in a women's penetentiary.  This film is one I recently caught on TCM and which I chose to watch as part of my Ida Lupino birthday celebration.

Women's Prison is a collage kind of movie, in that there are several different storylines taking place.  First, there's Helene Jensen (Phyllis Thaxter), who is serving a sentence for involuntary manslaughter after accidentally killing a child with her car.  Shocked and scared, Helene is barely able to function; although the kindly prison doctor (Howard Duff) advises against it, Helene is put immediately into quarantine and, ultimately, into a strait jacket. 

Entering the facility the same time as Helene is Brenda Martin (Jan Sterling), a repeat offender serving time for forgery.  Brenda is somewhat the mother hen of the group, always looking out for and helping the other girls. 

Joan Burton (Audrey Totter) is married to a man (Warren Stevens) who is incarcerated in the men's side of the prison; although they know it is against regulations, Joan and her husband yearn to see each other and will do whatever it takes for that to happen.  No matter how impossible it seems, Glenn Burton intends to find a way to reach the women's side of the prison, and when he finally gets there, there is a steep price to be paid.

Keeping watch over all these women is the cold-hearted superintendent, Amelia Van Zandt (Ida Lupino).  Although Miss Van Zandt claims she is rehabilitating the women, Dr. Crane accuses her of enjoying her power over them.  Calling her a psychopath, he charges that she dislikes the women and is jealous of them because they've known love---something she has not.  Though Dr. Crane repeatedly warns her about her ill-treatment of the women, Amelia perseveres with her harsh, brutal ways, until, unable to stand the treatment any longer, the inmates plan a revolt.

Though nowhere near the caliber of Caged, I found Women's Prison to be a solid, 3-star viewing experience.  Ida Lupino, who could portray a "good" girl and a "bad" girl equally well, was her usual terrific self.  She oozed coldness in this role, and I SO wanted her to receive her dues.  Jan Sterling, who, incidentally, was also in Caged, was terrific in her role as well.  I don't know, maybe it's the accent, but she was perfect as the smart aleck habitual offender.  Phyllis Thaxter was well cast in her part.  Her character was timid and scared, nearly completely broken at the thought of being incarcerated. Every role I've ever seen Phyllis in, she's gentle and kind, very soft-spoken...so she was perfectly suited to the character of Helene Jensen.  Howard Duff was fine as the compassionate doctor---no spectacular performance, just solid and believable....and what a beautiful voice!!  All in all, I liked this movie and recommend it.  Those who are fans of Ida Lupino, Howard Duff, or prison drama ought to especially enjoy it.  Be sure to see Caged as well (reviewed HERE) and then compare the two.

The film is out on DVD, so it should be fairly easy to track down.  Happy viewing!!

Pressure Point (4 stars)

Pressure Point, from 1962, is a hard-hitting racial/prison drama starring Sidney Poitier and Bobby Darin.  As often seemed to be the case, Mr. Poitier finds himself taking on a role in which his skin color is an issue.  Here in Pressure Point, he portrays a psychologist, and as the film begins, he reflects back to 1942, when he was practicing in a federal penetentiary.

A twenty-nine year old man (Bobby Darin), who has been sentenced to three years for sedition, is sent to the doctor because of erratic behavior and difficulty sleeping.  At the initial meeting of the two, the patient's lack of respect for the black doctor is obvious; though the doctor is irritated by the condescending atittude shown him, he is, nonetheless, determined to help the young man.

Feeling there is some deep-rooted reason for the man's aggression, the doctor questions him about his childhood, and a picture of an abusive father is brought forth.  Growing to manhood, the patient embraces the teachings of the Nazi party, giving him a hatred for blacks and Jews...a feeling that has only strengthened over time.  Believing that the purity of the white Christian stock is endangered by Negroes and Jews, he is an adamant believer in all things Nazi.

Will the doctor be able to help?  Will the patient let go of his bigotry and hatred?  These are the questions that play out in this hard-hitting drama.

Having only seen Bobby Darin in light romantic comedies, I was surprised to find how good he was in this kind of role.  I thought he was quite exceptional...really, in my mind, this was more Darin's show than Poitier's.  Yes, Mr. Poitier gave his usual wonderful performance, but I definitely feel Darin stole the show here.    It occurred to me that every Poitier film I've seen has him in a role where his skin color marks him for hatred and/or mocking.  I suppose that is to be expected given that he he made so many films in the late 50's and 60's; I wonder, though, if he ever grew weary of his characters always having to fight against the bigotry? I wonder if he would have enjoyed the chance to make a film where race wasn't an issue?   I suppose he did make films that were less "deep," but I just haven't seen any of those ones.

Unlike many of the racial dramas of that era, the cringe-inducing "n" word wasn't used one time in this film; instead, they used Negro over and over again.  Perhaps that word isn't used much nowadays, but I will certainly take it over the other "n" word.  Still, though, the man's hatred toward blacks and Jews is quite painful to watch.

While I don't believe Pressure Point is out on DVD, it is available in its entirety on YouTube.  HERE is the link if you'd like to watch this well-acted, hard-hitting film.

Happy viewing!!

Castle on the Hudson (3 stars)

Castle on the Hudson, from 1940, is a gritty prison drama starring John Garfield, with Ann Sheridan and Pat O'Brien taking on supporting roles.  It is a remake of the 1932 film, 20,000 Years in Sing Sing, which stars Spencer Tracy and Bette Davis. 

John Garfield plays Tommy Gordon, who, as the film begins, is convicted of robbery and sentenced to fifteen years at Sing Sing Prison.  Sure that his "bosses" will quickly spring him, Tommy arrives at the prison arrogant, feisty, and uncooperative.  He refuses to wear his uniform, which is too big, and he also refuses to work.   Prison warden Long (Pat O'Brien), whose ideas about running a prison are a bit off of mainstream, doesn't force Tommy to do anything; rather, he allows time alone to do its job of making Tommy a bit more cooperative. 

Tommy's girlfriend, Kay (Ann Sheridan), visits Tommy at the prison, informing him that one of his old buddies is pressuring the "bosses" into springing him.  In reality, though, the buddy isn't helping at all---he just wants Kay to think he is.  Really, he's after Kay, so he wants Tommy out of the picture---the longer Tommy is in prison, the more time the buddy has to pursue Kay.

Meanwhile, a group of inmates is planning a break-out, and while Tommy originally planned to go along with them, a look at the calendar changes his mind.  With the break-out scheduled for Saturday---Tommy's unlucky day---he is just too superstitious to join in, so although his cell door is unlocked, Tommy remains within and doesn't take part in the attempted break-out.

As it turns out, Tommy's fears are right-on; tipped off about the break-out attempt, the guards are ready and the rebellion is put down.  When Warden Long realizes that Tommy's cell was unlocked, yet he didn't attempt to break-out, he begins to trust Tommy.  Therefore, when the warden is informed that Kay is near death, he allows Tommy a furlough to go see her, making him promise that he will return to the prison that night.  Tommy promises he will return, but will he?  Will Tommy fulfill his word and return to prison after getting a taste of freedom? 

Castle on the Hudson is a well-acted, interesting film.  While I would give both this film and the original 3 stars, I actually prefer this one just a bit more, and that is because of John Garfield.  Spencer Tracy was good in the role of Tommy; however, I think Garfield was fabulous at portraying these kinds of hardened, cocky, unlikeable characters.  This isn't a favorite Garfield film by any means, but I definitely enjoyed it.  Why not watch both this film and the original and see which one you prefer?

Happy viewing!!