Watch Crime in the Streets For Free

Did you people see the same film I saw?

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

All aboard for cheesy sets and a lot of unconvincing talk, talk, talk with the usual stock characters and stock situations.James Whitmore, badly miscast, is a dead weight. Cassavetes is all sub-Brando method acting, but Sal Mineo is bit more with-it than usual.Nonetheless, the only really impressive performance is offered by Mark Rydell. On the negative side, production values are extremely crummy. Don Siegel, Sam Leavit, amd Franz Waxman should hang their heads in shame for respectively contributing such uninspired direction, plodding photography, and a pedestrian music score.And as for art director Serge Kriznan, he should be drummed out of town. Or maybe the shabby sets were entirely the fault of penny-pinching producer Vincent M. Fennelly?

Discovering that a disenfranchised local youth is planning a revenge murder, an altruistic social worker desperately tries to prevent the crime without police intervention in this juvenile delinquency drama directed by Don Siegel. The film is not particularly subtle with its agenda as lead actor James Whitmore bluntly states such truisms as "you can't tell a kid to be good" and as all parents find themselves exasperated by their kids in the most melodramatic manner possible. Will Kuluva is especially over-the-top as Sal Mineo's father who tries to get through to the boy by telling him that he wants to kiss him (!) while on the side telling Whitmore that he "has to hit" Mineo since it is all that the boy understands. The film features a phenomenal early turn by John Cassavetes though as the youth planning the murder with lots of subtle nuances whenever he listens to Whitmore lecture and as he plays on the fears of his friends. The real star of the show though is Siegel's directing work. Fresh from 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers', Siegel shoots the film with a myriad of intense close-ups as his young cast emote. The film also opens with a deathly intense pre-credits scene as good as anything Siegel ever directed. This is an odd movie: one hand, it is distractingly didactic; on the other hand, it looks so great and Cassavetes is so solid that is nevertheless involving.

A social worker tries to tame a street gang. Cassavetes is pretty good in his second film credit, although he was a bit old at 26 to be playing a teen. Rydell is quite creepy in his film debut as a psychotic gang member who can't conceal his glee at the thought of committing murder. Rydell, like Cassavetes, went on to become a director. His second film role would not come until 1973 in Robert Altman's "The Long Goodbye," when he played another frightening character. Mineo plays a character not unlike the one had just played in "Rebel Without a Cause." In his follow-up to "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," Siegel creates a gritty atmosphere but stresses the melodramatics.

The film reminds me of one of those powerhouse Studio One TV plays of the early '50's. And that's a key problem. The movie comes across as a filmed stage play as though the format hasn't changed at all. I expect TV playwrite Reginald Rose had a lot to do with that approach, while ace action director Don Siegel simply followed out the script in uninvolved fashion. In short, the screenplay is way too talky, under-produced, and poorly staged. Never once, for example, did I forget that the street scene was mounted on a sound stage, with all kinds of traffic noises at the same time cars seldom pass on the roadway. Also, the few sets are so unrelentingly dreary and without a shred of adornment, you might think the deficiency is in the people rather than the conditions. After all, a shred or two would be more realistic, even in a slum. So, why rub our nose in it.Then too, the screenplay repeats about every delinquency cliché of the day—alienation, no father, poverty, to cite a few. Now, there is some truth in these clichés, as there is in most clichés. The trouble is the script simply parades them in unoriginal fashion leaving the impression of having seen it all before. Worse, that intense actor John Cassavetes is given little to do but brood and posture and look 27 instead of the supposed 18. And what's with dressing him in a yuppie v-neck sweater that looks like it belongs on a Harvard freshman.Nonetheless, it is an accomplished cast with some colorful characterizations. Mineo's excellent as the reluctant delinquent, Gregg fairly oozes bread-winner exhaustion, and little Votrian can look pathetic on cue. At the same time, Rydell's sadistic grin suggests needed malevolence, while Whitmore's social worker is happily no miracle man. Clearly, this is an earnest effort whose heart is in the right place. Still and all, the positives are too few to outweigh the stagy negatives. In short, there're good reasons this obscurity is not included among the delinquency classics of the day.