Kid goes bad and stays bad
13 November 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Some low-budget crime flicks are forgettable but this production from Columbia Pictures' B-film unit is one that should be remembered. It features a strong central performance by William Campbell as real-life crook Caryl Chessman. William's younger brother Robert Campbell plays the character in flashbacks that first depict this guy as a teen, when his troubles with the law began.

In some ways it's a routine examination of what happens when a kid goes bad and stays bad. One thing that makes this picture standout, however, is the studio and director Fred Sears don't pour on the sympathy. At several points we are told how Chessman, using his middle name Whittier in the film, brought his own problems upon himself. The age-old argument about heredity or environment as a root cause of deviant behavior is disregarded. When he's busted for his crimes and eventually sent to a maximum security prison in Folsom, we are to believe he deserves the consequences.

Of course the real question is whether he deserves the death penalty. Typically, capital punishment was reserved for murderers. But in this case, Chessman/Whittier never killed anyone. He was convicted of kidnapping, which due to an obscure law that was later struck down, was considered an offense in which the guilty party could be executed.

Part of the reason Columbia made this picture is because Chessman had published a bestseller about his life while on death row in California. He managed to get several stays of execution between 1949 and 1960, before he was finally put to death in a gas chamber. During this period of time, his story became a huge talking point, especially among liberals seeking to abolish the death penalty. When CELL 2455 DEATH ROW was made, Chessman was in San Quentin, obviously still alive, and the outcome of his appeals was not yet known.

Since we are not allowed to pity him, we become voyeurs watching this tragedy unfold. We are watching the life of a career criminal unravel. Most of the characterization focuses on how smart Chessman was, since he fell in with a gang that successfully encroached upon a mobster's territory. And after Chessman was facing the gas chamber, he mounted a somewhat successful defense by studying the law and becoming his own attorney.

One thing I do laud the filmmakers for is that there is no clear depiction of whether or not Chessman/Whittier committed the rapes and kidnapping that would lead to his execution. He maintained that he was not the notorious lovers' lane red light bandit. So when we have those sequences starting at the 51-minute mark, the top half of the assailant is obscured on screen, and we only see the victims.

I suppose if he had confessed to those crimes before being put to death, a remake could have been made that showed why he "graduated" from robbery to rape. But in this film, there is no real concrete connection between some of the crimes, and we are kept in the dark about key events. That level of ambiguity increases the dramatic tension.

I do wonder if Chessman was allowed to see the film while he was behind bars, and if he did see it (or was told about it), what he thought. He went on to write three more books. That's a level of achievement most people out in the free world haven't matched.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed