It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

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.

Early WB "Pulled from the Headlines" Story that in this Case the "Headlines" were Literally the Gist of the Movie. This is One of those Newspaper Exposes Popular in the Early Thirties when "Print" was The Thing. Gangsters could be Exposed and Brought Down by "The Press" that could Alert Authorities and Stir Public Outrage. "Crusaders" was a Term Often Used to Describe those Pushing to Remove Vice and Murder from the Streets.In this One, Silent Star Richard Bartholomew, Regis Toomey, and Fay Wray are the Headliners with Clark Gable (in his fourth film) Supporting. The Film has its Moments of Intrigue Concerning Payoffs and Gangs, Crime Reporters and Ethics. There is Quite a Contrast here from the Spit-Fire Dialogs that were a Trademark of the Genre and Bartholomew's Slow Delivery and Stiff Performance may put Some to Sleep. But it is a Relief from the Usual Machine Gun Spouting that was Routine at the Time.Regis Toomey is, well, Breezy as Breezy the Third Wheel in this Triangle and Fay Wray has that Pleasant Voice and Delivery and is Filmed Quite Cute. Clark Gable, some say, Steals the Show but His Character here doesn't do much Except Maybe in a Scene or Two, and is OK but Surely Nothing Special.There are some Pre-Code Interest like an Unrepentant Protagonist and Pre-Marital Overnighting, but Not Much Else. Overall, Based on a True Story and with Enough Interest to Recommend, this One is Not a Must See but is Worth a Watch.

This is another film I had to see in my unhealthy quest to see all of the available Fay Wray films out there. However, this film surprised me, as it was a pretty good story. It also has a young Clark Gable as a gangster in a scene stealing role that demonstrates his star power very early in his career. The plot has been covered in other reviews, so I'll keep my review short.The pluses: Fay looks great, Clark Gable is good, and the story is solid and interesting.The minuses: Richard Barthelmess is fine, but being from the south, he shouldn't have even tried the accent.Overall a fine film and definitely worth a viewing.

It pays to watch a movie more than once. When I first saw "The Finger Points", I found it to be an enjoyable Warner Bros crime flick with few surprises. I just had the opportunity to see it again, and I found all kinds of interesting gimmicks.A young reporter, played by Richard Barthalmess, migrates from Savannah, to the big city to make his mark. He is picked up by a tabloid and charged with exposing the political/criminal junta that runs the town. He falls in love with his coworker, played by a yummy Fay Wray, and in his quest to hit the big time, gets his hands dirty. He throws in with the mob, eventually double crosses them for love, and gets his in the end.What is interesting about this movie, and what I never realized the first time I saw it, was that it was a tale ripped from the headlines of the day. After extorting money from the mob to bury the corruption, he is finally introduced to "Number One". We don't get to see his face, but he obviously represents Al Capone. The biggest scam of them all involves the mob moving in and taking over an entire city. They transform it into a mecca for gambling, bootleg liquor, speakeasies, and all manner of corruption. In the movie they call it Waverly, but it describes Capone's takeover of Cicero perfectly. Finally, the corrupt reporter with mob connections is gunned down in the street. I finally made the connection to a real life incident involving a reporter in Chicago named Jake Lingle. They even had a funeral procession down the main boulevard just as they did for Jake.These details may not mean much to everybody, but they make for a realistic story that, left to the hack writers imagination, would probably not be nearly as good. The dialog is kind of stilted, and the likable Richard Barthalmess' performance is predictably wooden, but nothing is perfect. If you're a crime buff, this is a winner.Note: In 1931, Clark Gable was just getting a toe hold in the business. In this movie he gets 4th billing as a gangster henchman.

Socially-conscious Warners/First National delivered a corker of a newspaper melodrama in 1931, but this wasn't it: It was "Five Star Final." This fast-moving but muddled early talkie shares the crowded city desk with editors yelling "stop the presses!" and a cursory examination of the process of putting out a news daily. But here, the paper is genuinely excellent and socially responsible, not a muckraking tabloid. And the idealistic cub reporter (Barthelmess, who looks far too old to be a cub reporter) turns rotten awfully quickly, becoming a yes-man to a mobster (Gable in a typical early role, and effortlessly natural and likeable). It drains audience sympathy for our hero, and we don't see why his journalistically wise, sob-sister colleague (Wray, who looks too young to have Seen It All) would stick around with him, or take him back without his having really reformed. The motivations are confused throughout, and when our hero meets an unhappy fate, the movie seems to mourn him, but we don't. It's like a morality tale without a clear moral. Warners got better at its social realism quickly, and Barthelmess went from this comparative potboiler to the far more interesting "Cabin in the Cotton" -- again playing an idealistic sap, albeit one with more consistency.