I just watched it a bit ago and thought it was a really neat flick. This is the original scar face from 1932 and not the wonderful 1983 remake (which is deserving of it's own thread).

While its not safe to compare the two or say one is better then the other ... if your a fan of the 1983 version you should really pick up the original.

A interesting fact is the bullets fired during this film were real (No squid charges or blanks were used)! In the scenes where they are ducking trying to avoid being "hit" in the film .. well they are actually ducking for their lives. Kinda interesting if you think about it. The director wanted "realism" and well .. um got it.

I haven't watched it and I'm not really interested on watching old movies unless they're scary.

Wow..I honestly never knew there was a Scarface older than Scarface . I had actually never even seen the 80's Scarface till about 2 or 3 years ago when they came out with the remastered edition and got all that hype going again. Is it the same exact story, and without spoiling it I guess, is the ending similar?

Similar but not ... it's set during prohibition instead of the drug trade. There are similarities but there are enough differences to make it worth the watch. Don't get me wrong I absolutely love the remake and think it ranks as one of the best remakes ever. However if your a serious fan of the Al Pacino version you should give the original a shot

I think this sounds like a great film. I'm not too keen on modern films, I think the best ever made are the old ones, and some of them were produced with a low budget. I think I may have to rent this one out, and check it out

Real Bullets?!?! That's insane!
Just because of that, I want to watch it. I've only seen the 83.
Hope those actors got paid....a lot.
Now if only we had some ballsy actors like that around nowadays...
I guess we'll have to live with Jackie Chan doing his own stunts for now. =]

Ringcrisis, did you know until the recent raise of the union, actors were contracted for so long, or so many films to a studio? They didn't really get to chose to do or not to do a film like they do today. It also meant that if a studio wanted your career over, they could tell you to act for a complete hack.

I had no idea!
Thanks for the heads up!
Changes things around a bit.

Hmm interesting NoTx ... very interesting. I didn't know that as well. It's kind of a shame how the unions and guilds have flip sided though. It's impossible to work in Hollywood without being a member of one and its impossible to join the actors guild without being in a major commercial or have a speaking role in a film .... Kinda became a double-edged sword.

I still haven't seen the 80's version! Never really had the opportunity yet. So ya know I havn't seen the very old version.