FIlm History

Name:
Institution:
Course:
Date:
Film History
The New Yolk Times magazine review.
The Public Enemy was an action film released in 1931 by a popular director named William A. Wellman. The film was criticized and supported by many movie review analysts before its initial release. For instance, Andre Sennwald happened to review the film before its initial release. He published his overall analysis as an article on the New York Time magazine for the citizen to read. According to Sennwald, the Public Enemy film was just a gangster themed movie that contains a weaker storyline by it was well facilitated by action scenes that made it enjoyable to watch (Sennwald, 1). Additionally, the prime intention for many gangster film producers such as Warner in the 1930s was aimed at exposing the criminals who operated the underworld. Therefore, the Public Enemy was based on the principle of highlighting the violence and criminality of the underworld mob culture (Sennwald, 1).
Consequently, many elements of movie reviews were used by Andre Sennwald in his review. These factors incorporate the entertainment value of the movie, the motivation of events that happened in the film, the social importance of film, the aesthetic value and social values projected in the film. For instance, he acknowledges the fact that the film was interesting and entertaining in nature (Sennwald, 1). The frequent explosion of machine-guns fire was effective in projecting the action nature of the film. The setting of the movie is based during the prohibition days where the public quest for drinking made the underworld criminals rich.

They also project life through the great depression period and how the public was in need of loans and financial relief. Therefore, the movie managed to express the social importance at that period.
Besides, Andre Sennwald liked the fact that the crime projected by gangsters needed to be brought to light and the film manage to successful outlined the barbaric crimes done by the underworld criminals such as slapping women, killing rival beer men and operating illegal businesses for self-satisfaction (Sennwald, 1). Hence, this projected the social value of the film. However, he disliked the fact that the film failed to project the fight between the upper worlds against the underworld. The entire film is based the criminals fighting one another.
The review of Andre Sennwald represents the facts that needed the spotlight in the movie as per what was affecting the society during the 1930s. For instance, the film could have projected the solutions on how the government could have reduced or wrecked the underworld. The issue of prohibition was affecting the society in the early 20th century. Therefore, it was a serious issue that the government needed help in eliminating it.
Time Magazine review
Simultaneously, the reviewer disagrees with the fact that people had speculated that the Public Enemy was similar or relates to Scarface or Little Caesar that were rated the best gangster movies of that era (Time Magazine, 1). More ever, the film portrays a true or a hard picture of the young unheroic hoodlums. The reviewer used many elements of movie reviews in his review. These factors incorporate the entertainment value of the movie, the motivation of events that happened in the film, the social importance of film, the aesthetic value and social benefits projected in the film. For example, even though the movie did not show any socially subversive text or a sociological treatise, the film still managed to be interesting as an action themed film (Time Magazine, 1).
Furthermore, the social value of the movie was based on countering the perceived facts that gangster movies were the prime inspiration and source of criminal behavior for many young people. In the film, it shows the violence experienced in the underworld rivalry, and this discouraged many people who admired the crime life. Therefore, the film lacked the heroic character that would have influenced young men into criminality. Psychological immaturity was also projected in the film when men were demonstrated as a beast who did not know how to treat women. These scenes had social value for viewers to learn (Time Magazine, 1).

Contrarily, the reviewer liked the fact that the film had projected the expected rise and collapses of the gangster movement that was being cheered by the Capone’s mentorship. The main characters of the film lack organizational role, they dwell in subordinate duties and mostly obey instructions like puppets who are untroubled by any interest of escaping the violent lifestyle (Time Magazine, 1). However, the reviewer disliked the fact that the film had omitted detailed and substantial fact about how the politicians had collaborated with gangsters has projected by the reality of that time. The unholy friendship between politicians and gangsters were common in the 1930s.
Conclusion
In conclusion, from the two reviews, it can be noted that the two reviewers had a similar ideology in regards to how the film stratified every aspect of social culture roles, entertainment, aesthetic value, and social values. In the 1930s, the issue of domestic violence was very common, and the film managed to project how women used to be often beaten. From the two reviews, the historical background of the film was in the prohibition era, and the two reviewers have managed to acknowledge it has a factor that encouraged the development of the underworld.
Work Cited
Sennwald Andre. The Public Enemy. The New York Times Website, 1931. http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=EE05E7DF173CE273BC4C51DFB266838A629EDE
Time Magazine. Cinema: The New Pictures. Time Inc website, 1931. HYPERLINK “http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,741585,00.html” http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,741585,00.html