BY JOHN BILLINGER
Are you a fan of classic film noir? Do you like action films? Do you like movies with violence? Are you not bothered when you see a film that says “based on a true story” but includes very little truth in its “true story”? Then this is the film for you.
Gangster Squad (2013) was directed by Ruben Fleischer, released by Warner Bros, stars Josh Brolin, Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Sean Penn, Anthony Mackie, and Michael Pena, and is set against the backdrop of Los Angeles in 1949. It tells the true-ish story of the Gangster Squad, a group of cops who went undercover to take down the mafia. This film (like some of the other films I’ve talked about) had a somewhat complicated production history, but not because someone stole the footage or it got Christians protesting its release.
No. What happened was the film was set to be released in August 2012. Then, a month before release, the infamous Aurora, Colorado Theater shooting took place. Due to the excessive gun violence and a scene where the characters shoot up L.A. landmark Grauman’s Chinese Theatre, the film was delayed until January of 2013 (the dumping ground of film crap), and the scene at Grauman’s was cut and replaced with a scene taking place in the Chinatown district.
I remember seeing ads for the film on tv, and I thought that it looked cool enough. You got gangsters vs. cops. It’s in a cool setting. It’s sure to be a hit, right? Well, while the film did ok at the box office, its critical reception was a bit on the negative side, with most praising the production values, but critiquing the story and characters. Regardless of what the critics thought, I always thought it looked cool, so ten years after it opened, I decided to check it out for myself.
It’s 1949 Los Angeles, and war veteran/cop John O’Mara (played by Josh Brolin) is unhappy that the city he loves is in the grip of mob boss Mickey Cohen (played by Sean Penn). The Chief of Police is also unhappy with the state of things, so he assigns John O’Mara a task to put together a team of cops to go undercover as gangsters to bring down Mickey Cohen. And that’s pretty much all you need to know about the story. It’s really basic.
When talking about a film that deals with a historical topic, it’s common to compare and contrast the real version with the film version, so here are all the things Gangster Squad got right about the real Gangster Squad:
- In the late 40s, the LAPD Police Chief created the Gangster Squad to go after criminals.
- Mickey Cohen was the top mob boss in L.A. during this time period.
- That’s about it…
The rest of the film is all fiction. Sure, the characters and events in the film are all inspired by real people and events, but it’s nothing like actual events. For example, several characters who die in the film actually died several years after 1949. Mickey Cohen was finally arrested in 1951(for tax evasion, not *spoilers murder as depicted in the film), Italian mafia boss Jack Dragna was not really a big player in the L.A. underworld as depicted here, etc. You could probably go all day if you were a historian on the topic. Even the casting is a bit off. I mean, Sean Penn doesn’t really look anything like Mickey Cohen.
I’m sure there are people who probably won’t like the film based on its historical accuracy, but I’m more forgiving. As I said in the Britannic review, sometimes you need to stretch the facts. Whatever makes for an interesting story, and given that this film is more of an action film than a docu-drama, I’d say the filmmakers just wanted to do a fun period-piece story. Plus, if they did the Squad timeline correctly, it would’ve been told over the course of several years and that probably would’ve interfered with the pacing.
The story is about as simple and black and white as it gets. You got the good cops vs the evil gangsters. There’s not really much to say. If you’ve seen The Untouchables (another period film about cops vs gangsters), it’s basically the same thing. Similar plot. Silmar set up. Similar characters. Except that The Untouchables has better writing than this (and in general, is a better film), and is only slightly more historically accurate (but not by much).
Gangster Squad is easily more fun to watch than that film. Where The Untouchables is slower and more intelligent, Gangster Squad is fast-paced and more focused on action rather than making you think. I still prefer the former, but there was definitely more action on the screen in the latter film.
The actors in the film all do a good job despite the fact that all the characters are basically one-note stock characters. You’ve got John O’Mara, the tough-stoic-no-nonsense cop who’s the main character. You’ve got Ryan Gosling’s character, who goes from being a somewhat dirty cop to a good guy in the first half-hour (he’s really the only character with any form of arc).
There’s Emma Stone’s character, who’s the femme fatale of this film (there’s not really much to her). The rest of the gangster squad have little going for them, aside from one trait for each character. You’ve got the tech guy, the African-American guy, the old gunslinger guy, and the Mexican guy. They never do much with any of them. I can’t tell you much about any of them. It’s a shame because they’re all played by good actors. Still, they’re given nothing to really work with, and even if they were all given just one trait, I feel a more talented writer could’ve easily used the environment the film is set in to get you to care about the characters.
And it’s curious how the film is set in 1949 Los Angeles, and both Anthony Mackie and Michael Pena’s characters encounter very few racial issues outside of one scene. Perhaps the film needed a better writer to flesh out the characters and their surroundings to get you to care more about them. Then there’s Mickey Cohen, who is just a big bad gangster. There’s really nothing with Cohen in this film that you haven’t seen in other gangster films. He makes for a decent villain, but he’s nothing special. And really, storywise, there’s nothing to write home about.
One thing that is well done is the production. This film looks fantastic. It goes for that 40s/50s technicolor look, and it’s wonderful. And the sets, the costumes, the music, the cars, everything screams the 1940s. The directing is also good. Ruben Fleischer’s previous directing duties were comedies like Zombieland and 30 Minutes or less. His directing in this film got some criticism back in the day.
For example, Roger Ebert said that Fleischer was “out of his element, and barely suppressing his urge to spoof the genre.” While I do think that the film takes itself too seriously (almost to the point where it’s almost laughable at times), I think he made an entertaining action film. There are a lot of good gunfights and car chases that’ll keep you entertained throughout.
Overall, this is not a great movie. There’s very little that’ll get you to come back, but if you want a film that’s entertaining to watch and doesn’t require you to think, then this is for you. Personally, I’m a fan of 40s/50s noir films and have read a lot about the mafia’s history, so I found it entertaining, and perhaps you will too, even if you don’t know much about noir or the mafia. If anything, you can at least put it on in the background. But definitely don’t pay money to see it. Rent it or watch it on Netflix. You’ll get more value from it that way.
Side Note: This film features quite a few cool cars from the era. Here are a few screenshots of three of my favorites, which include the 1936 Chrysler Airflow, the 1948 Cadillac Series 62, and the 1947 Studebaker Champion.
You must be logged in to post a comment.