Though less well-known than its 1983 remake, 1932’s Scarface remains the more important film. While not the first gangster movie, it offered a seminal effort in the genre.

Set in Chicago circa the 1920s, Tony Camonte (Paul Muni) operates as a bodyguard for crime boss Louis Costillo (Harry J. Vejar). However, Tony turns on his employer and guns him down to join forces with competitor Johnny Lovo (Osgood Perkins).

This allows Tony to exert his influence and become more important in the local scene. Tony eventually becomes a leader on his own and becomes the most feared and influential gangster in town.

I never got the appeal of the 1983 Scarface. It seemed campy and over the top 41 years ago and it comes across as even sillier today.

This sent me into the 1932 film with fairly high hopes. Long regarded as a genre classic, I figured it would offer a much more satisfying experience than the goofy Brian De Palma version.

And it does fare better than the 1983 take. However, it comes with enough issues that I don’t find it to offer one of the stronger 1930s genre flicks.

This edition comes with some good moments and it remains a hugely important genre effort. However, the 1932 Scarface can feel as campy and over the top as the 1983 one.

Actually, my concerns mainly stem from Muni’s lead performance. Though he chews less scenery than Al Pacino does in the remake, he still overplays the role.

Indeed, I began to wonder if Pacino’s rabid Tony Montana acted as an homage to Muni’s work. No, Muni doesn’t devour the sets to the same degree, but he still goes over the top.

Some might defend Muni’s performance as part of its era. Of course, I understand that movie acting in this period tended to seem more theatrical than we’d get accustomed to seeing once the more naturalistic styles became dominant in the 1950s.

Nonetheless, even among his peers in Scarface, Muni seems cartoony. He creates an unfavorably contrast to his co-stars.

This feels especially clear because Muni shares the screen at times with George Raft as Tony’s lieutenant Guino "Little Boy" Rinaldo. Raft creates the sense of menace and dark chemistry that we want from our lead.

Instead, Muni adopts a broad Chico Marx-style stab at an Italian accent and hams up the joint. Muni’s performance becomes the weakest aspect of the film.

The rest of Scarface tends to satisfy more. While not the most concise narrative, the story does move at a decent rate and gives us good forward momentum.

Hawks brings a moody tone to the film that allows it a satisfying sense of stark drama. Stylistically, the film offers a compelling piece.

If only I could get past its lead actor, I suspect I’d like the 1932 Scarface much more than I do. Unfortunately, Muni’s work makes the movie less effective than it could be.

Scarface appears in an aspect ratio of approximately 1.35:1 on this 4K UHD Disc. Expect up and down visuals.

With the original negative presumably long-gone, the package’s booklet statesthe image came from a “35mm duplicate negative”. On the positive side, the image failed to suffer from any print flaws - a minor miracle due to the flick’s vintage – and a strong layer of grain implied no heavy-handed noise reduction.

However, the film felt somewhat soft much of the time. Many shots offered good delineation, but a lot of it looked fuzzy and ill-defined.

That said, I felt delineation improved moderately as the movie progressed. The first act fared the worst so while I still found inconsistent accuracy after that, matters tended to fare better.

Blacks were generally fairly deep, but whites tended to be too bright at times, and this negatively impacted contrast. This probably is the best anyone can do with the film, but it doesn’t match up with the more impressive transfers of films from this one’s era.

As for the film’s LPCM monaural audio, it seemed positive for a project from 1932. Speech lacked natural tones but the lines remained intelligible and reasonably concise, without edginess or issues.

Typical for 1932 movies, not much music appeared. When we heard snatches, those components seemed perfectly competent, if not with much range.

The same went for effects. These elements came across as thin but they also lacked distortion or similar concerns.

The audio lacked pops, hiss or source flaws. This became a more than satisfactory track for a 92-year-old flick.

How did the 4K UHD compare to the simultaneously released Criterion Blu-ray? Both came with identical audio.

Visuals also seemed pretty similar. While I thought the 4K looked a smidgen tighter and showed slightly superior blacks, I couldn't find much to separate the two.

Only minor extras appear here, and we find a Conversation with Author Megan Abbott and Actor Bill Hader. Their chat lasts 37 minutes, 47 seconds.

They talk about their experiences with the film and its genre, some production elements and their view of the flick. Essentially an appreciation of Scarface, we get some decent notes but I can’t claim the reel told me a ton of value.

We also get a 17-minute, 18-second Interview with Film Scholar Lea Jacobs in which she examines technical aspects of Scarface, with an emphasis on sound and dialogue editing. Jacobs covers this look at innovation in the early days of “talkies” offers useful information.

Used for a “Censored” version of Scarface, we find a 13-minute, six-second Alternate Ending on its own. More traditional than the theatrical finale, “Alternate” does not seem bad on its own, but the original ending works better.

We conclude with a booklet that features art, credits and an essay from film historian Imogen Sara Smith. It winds up the set in a positive manner.

With a better performance from its lead actor, I’d find myself more fond of 1932’s Scarface. However, Paul Muni damages an otherwise pretty solid gangster flick. The Blu-ray comes with dated but generally positive picture and audio along with minor bonus materials. While I appreciate the movie’s place in history, the 1932 Scarface only sporadically conencts.

To rate this film visit the original review of SCARFACE