The film's technical aspects are solid, such as Max Steiner's scoring and Sidney Hickox's camera work, which does not rely on close-ups, rather emphasizing the greater picture; but neither is the compelling feature that one finds in the best films noir; another reason this film fails that claim. The screenplay, by Ivan Goff and Ben Roberts, from a tale by Virginia Kellogg, is good, but not great. Like many of the same era thrillers by Alfred Hitchcock it is larded with too much Freudianism and not enough realism (note how Fallon assumes the role of Jarrett's confessor and benefactor after he learns Ma Jarrett is dead). Still, given that it was coming out at a time when the 1930s gangster film era was fading, the genre had to go somewhere. Also, the film, while it does a good job in setting Fallon up as the mole, meanders too much. The whole Big Ed-Verna romance is overdone because it's obvious that Big Ed has no chance against Jarrett, and the whole Ma-Jarrett relationship, like that, a decade later, in Psycho, is just a bit too forced. In fact, it gets to the point that Ma, not Verna, can be seen as the femme fatale in Jarrett's life that leads him to doom (even as she is dead), one of the few points one can argue in favor of White Heat being a film noir. The best part of the film is the acting. Wycherly, as Ma, is very good, and Edmond O'Brien shows why he was an Oscar caliber actor in a very good portrayal of Fallon/Pardo. But, as usual in his films, Cagney not only is brilliant, but he dominates the screen. It's interesting to note that the 1950s saw the rise of the Method Acting style, yet almost all of the discernible physical inflections of that style were present in Cagney's role here, as well as in earlier roles. In fact, I would argue that Cagney was not only the most influential actor in American film history (for look how much of Method Madness stole from him), but also the most important and nonpareil (if not perhaps the best) for look how many imitators Brando and De Niro have had, but who can do Cagney without falling lamely short? This is because Cagney is not aiming for realism in his performances, but feelism- he aims to make the viewer feel things, not be uplifted.
White Heat is not a great piece of cinema, but it's damned good. It's a bit too reliant upon the formulae of gangster films to break too much new ground, but it is crisp, taut, and there are only a few moments that are lulls. There is no higher ideal being trumpeted, but what little music it plays it plays well, as a great genre piece of cinema. Yet, oddly, unlike Cagney's earlier gangster classic, The Public Enemy, this film, while more realistic, in terms of its science and the politics of crime, is less realistic, in terms of its characters' motivations and development. Still, it's a treat to watch, and far above what passes for action or thriller fare today. In terms of being able to pull off a tough guy role, yet still move a viewer, Cagney was and is is still king!
White Heat is not a great piece of cinema, but it's damned good. It's a bit too reliant upon the formulae of gangster films to break too much new ground, but it is crisp, taut, and there are only a few moments that are lulls. There is no higher ideal being trumpeted, but what little music it plays it plays well, as a great genre piece of cinema. Yet, oddly, unlike Cagney's earlier gangster classic, The Public Enemy, this film, while more realistic, in terms of its science and the politics of crime, is less realistic, in terms of its characters' motivations and development. Still, it's a treat to watch, and far above what passes for action or thriller fare today. In terms of being able to pull off a tough guy role, yet still move a viewer, Cagney was and is is still king!