Gangster Genre and the effects of The Production Code

The Gangster film genre emerged in Hollywood during the early 1930s. Serving as a newer genre that reflected themes of the Great Depression with fantastical elements. An example film of this genre would be the original Scarface (1932), this movie and others showed audiences the complete uprise and downfall of outrageous criminals, glorified violence of the criminal craft and how this aligned with actual morals. This era of cinema in this country connected with the period of minimal regulation within film making, this allowed for artists to explore crazier and taboo themes that cinema had not produced yet. However, the Motion Picture Production code or commonly known among audiences as the Hays Code, was enforced beginning around the mid 1930s to help regulate content that was deemed morally unacceptable. The code created mandates on films. Requiring any film to avoid explicit depictions of violence, sexual scenarios and criminal activity and required that the criminals of the story to be punished as fit to hold a sense of order even in a fantasy world where the same rules may not apply. Now, comparing Gangster films pre-code and post-code, with again the original Scarface (1932) and other films like The Killers (1946) and White Heat (1949). The comparison between them demonstrates not only what exactly was censored but also why the content was censored in the first place. Going beyond just controlling content that would grace screens, all of these measures produced by the code would reveal more concerns ethically and culturally about morals, the influence audiences hold and the overall responsibilities of Hollywood and its executives.  

The Production Code, which was formally created in 1930 and enforced in and around 1934, was designed specifically to regulate what content was morally in response to criticism from audiences around the country. The concerns and criticism received centered around religion, sexual themes and violence. There was also a growing concern of cinema’s true effects on society. Under the formed code, criminal doings could never be glorified and as stated in the first paragraph, all criminals were then required to face a fit punishment for their devious actions within the story. Also, sexual content, use of illegal substances and any example of morally wrong relationships were restricted and banned. Social taboos were also prohibited from depiction on the screen. The gangster genre was a focus for censors because it often presented the anti-social behaviors in ways that could inspire admiration over moral reflection. This genre was created to show mischief and a fantasy world of crime that the average viewer knows nothing about. Pre-code gangster films frequently showcased criminals with intricate methods of doing crime along with truly lavish lifestyles. According to Mark Vierra, who wrote his piece, Sin in Soft Focus: Pre-Code Hollywood, censors feared that these portrayals could begin eroding all social values and actually encourage criminal activity among viewers who are easily influenced. This is also seen as reckless because of the widespread economic hardship faced by many. The ethical logic of the code then centered on protecting these audiences from immoral influence while enforcing social order which at the time seemed respectable. Scarface (1932), directed by Howard Hawks and then produced by Howard Hughes, truly shows life of filmmaking prior to the code as a film with tensions that would later be addressed by that exact code. This film follows the main character of Tony Camonte, a gangster who is ruthless and has high ambitions in the setting of Chicago as he rises to power in the world of crazy organized crime. Early scenes of the film shows his charismatic side, his violent dominance and then his truly lavish lifestyle. This lifestyle includes over the top displays of wealth and a sexual relationship shown on screen. These elements cultivate a glamorous view on organized criminal activity and showed viewers a morally askew protagonist which would be exactly what the code would be built against.  

The Hays office originally objected to several of the taboo elements shown in Scarface (1932), including the graphic depictions of violence and the glorification of Tony’s criminal lifestyle he had created along with how this would effect viewers. Scenes in this film involving shootings, murders and other elaborate heists or robberies were either cut or changed to be toned down, and other additional dialogue was created and dubbed over to emphasize the eventual downfall of Tony. The original ending suggested a vague ending for the character, but the revised version required an explicit version of his death to satisfy the rules and framework decided by the Production Code. The reasoning behind these choices were grounded in perspectives of “ethical responsibility” as the film should not be allowed to endorse crime and audiences needed to witness the actual consequences of criminals who are caught performing heinous acts. This is discussed also in G. D. Black’s piece Hollywood Censored: Morality Codes, Catholics, and the Movies along with the quote, “Hollywood’s self-censorship reflected not only industry concerns about morality but also the influence of powerful social groups, including the Catholic Church” (Black). This all reflects the dual concerns of the code, which is a practical attempt to control content in cinema and an ethical trial to influence social behavior through media consumed.  

Now by contrast, the film White Heat (1949) which was directed by Raoul Walsh, represents a post-code world for the gangster genre in which the Production Code now has a direct influence on all produced content. This film follows main character of Cody Jarrett, a criminal who is psychopathic and leads a life of crime which ultimately is destructed. As opposed to films produced pre-code, White Heat (1949) is seen as adhering directly to the moral implications of the Hays Code where criminal behavior, no matter how compelling it may be was ultimately punished in the end. While violence could still remain present on screen and the protagonist was very complex, the depictions of onscreen crime were less glamourized, and all sexual content was highly restricted. The relationship audiences see between Cody Jarrett and his wife is primarily implied content, Then the climactic death of his character serves as a moral lesson than a prevail for the criminal lifestyle.

The comparison of Scarface (1932) and White Heat (1949) shows just how influential the Production Code was on the Gangster genre in this time period. The pre-code films allowed audiences to empathize with the criminals on screen and actually explore what was morally right and wrong to these characters. The post-code films however framed criminal activity behind bars or ethical framework that they decided on. The reasoning behind the censorship exceeds beyond all immediate visual content audiences could grasp. The censorship reflected a broader concerns in society such as law, order and morality. According to Doherty with their study titled Pre-Code Hollywood: Sex, Immorality, and Insurrection in American Cinema 1930–1934, censors believed that these films reaching wider audiences had the great protentional of shaping culture norms and individual behaviors of those watching. The Hays Code, then acted as both a protective ethical measure and a means of cultural control. This would then enforce a standardized vision of what was right and wrong that reached further from just what was happening between the screen and the audience. Ethically, the censorship of these Gangster films under the discretion of the Production Code illuminates the tension between artistic expression of the filmmakers and social responsibility of all. While these filmmakers all sought to create complex characters who are all morally different in these scenarios, the code still enforced a singular ethical perspective that crime does not pay and should not be seen as such. This tension raised questions about the autonomy of those creating art and what influences actually happened with this media produced. On one hand, the censorship limited the filmmaker’s freedom to explore these heavy but realistic narratives and on the other, it reflected a belief that carried again the ethical responsibility of the public. Gangster films, then became a site of arguments and discussion between narrative innovation of storytelling and moral obligation. Reflecting broader debates of the role of media in society. 

In conclusion, Gangster films during the Production Code era offer a clear example of just how cinema connected along with forms of ethical regulation. Pre-code films discussed such as Scarface (1932) showed how criminals could be complex as they were charismatic while postcode films such as White Heat (1949) presented crime as only punishable and destructive of one’s character. The censorship seen in these films was guided by a mix of reasoning through ethics, protecting audiences from the allure of committing criminal acts and maintaining control of social norms and public trust. Overall controlling what the public was seeing and how they understood it. By analyzing this genre through the lens of both sides of the Production Code, it became clear that the evolution of Hollywood’s ethical foundations and framework were inseparable from anxiety of the public which shapes not only the stories told but also the moral messages that get intertwined with them. The Production Code functioned as both a tool of censorship and also as a reflection of the ethical governing of our society in time of the early and near mid twentieth century. 

Works Cited 

Skinner, James M., and Gregory D. Black. “Hollywood Censored: Morality Codes, Catholics, and the Movies.” The American Historical Review, vol. 101, no. 1, Feb. 1996, p. 252, https://doi.org/10.2307/2169375.

Koppes, Clayton, and Thomas Doherty. “Pre-Code Hollywood: Sex, Immorality, and Insurrection in American Cinema, 1930-1934.” The American Historical Review, vol. 

106, no. 3, June 2001, p. 1009, https://doi.org/10.2307/2692426.  

Fell, John. “Review: The Dame in the Kimono: Hollywood, Censorship, and the Production Code from the 1920s to the 1960s by Leonard J. Leff, Jerold L. Simmons.” Film 

Quarterly, vol. 43, no. 4, 1990, pp. 46–46, https://doi.org/10.2307/1212740.

Vieira, Mark A. Sin in Soft Focus. 1 Oct. 1999.