<figure><img src="image_66.png" /><figcaption>Figure 64: Connor's body revealed by the mirror on the door in *Road to Perdition*, Mendes, Sam. *Road to Perdition*. 2002.</figcaption></figure>

Concerning *Boardwalk Empire*, explicit violence is even more expected since the show was broadcast by HBO which is historically associated with visual violence as “Such strong violence has become stereotypically tied with HBO since it first broadcast in the 1970s [...] It was ‘quality TV’, which challenged genre conventions and audience excitations and thus used violence in a very different way than audiences had become accustomed to.”<fnref n="137" /> For instance, the series *The Untouchable* released in the 1960s was very violent and caught the attention of the audience and critics whereas “in the contemporary media the niche marketing of series such as *Boardwalk Empire* with its even more gratuitous violence barely raises an eyebrow.”<fnref n="138" /> In *Boardwalk Empire*, most of the violence in the show is caused by Nucky. He uses intermediaries to eliminate those who represent a threat and his rivals. However, he always tries to negotiate before resorting to murder, especially in the first seasons. This differentiates him from the stereotypes about his Irish ethnicity, he is not easily vexed or angered so much that it drives him to violence. Contrary to Irish gangsters in films from the 1930s, like Tom Powers, Nucky isn’t impulsive and unstable. Nucky is detached which is shown by the fact he rarely kills his opponents himself, contrary to Tom who enjoys doing it in person. His character is closer to Michael’s since they are both thought-through. However, Nucky is more nuanced since the show reveals his different facets throughout the seasons. He is also less likable than Michael because he doesn’t have strong moral principles. This is highlighted by the fact he isn’t trustworthy as he is a liar and a cheater, he lies in his speeches and even to those close to him and repeatedly cheats on Margaret. Yet, he is still appreciated by the audience, because he is multifaceted, compared with one-dimensional, short-tempered and cruel characters like Rossetti and Narcisse. Nucky is collected and rational and tries to always control his emotions. After murdering Jimmy himself, he is more prompt to kill in person and less likely to negotiate.

<footnote n="137">¹³⁷ Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 187.</footnote>

<footnote n="138">¹³⁸ Ron Wilson, *The Gangster Film: Fatal Success in American Cinema*, New-York: Wallflower, 2015, 80.</footnote>
One example that shows that Nucky is capable of ruthless behavior, is when he plans the murders of all the brothers of the D'Alessio gang. They are killed by his men while he delivers a speech about the rise of criminality since the establishment of the 18th Amendment and his efforts to put an end to it, which shows his duplicitous character. His words contrast with the images of explicit violence, a crosscutting shows the four brothers being murdered one after the other intertwined with shots of Nucky's speech. The last murder is particularly violent, there is a close up of the victim while Jimmy Darmody slits his throat.

The show portrays many violent characters and is particularly explicit in its representation of violence. For instance, Rosetti is one of the most violent characters, which is shown right away. Once again his character echoes the 1930s Italian stereotypes when it comes to violence. This character is associated with one of the most violent scenes in the series. The first time the viewer sees him at the beginning of season three, he asserts his short temper and aggressive behavior. He and his men are having car troubles and a passerby comes to help them. The man uses a word Rosetti doesn't know to describe oil which vexes him. He attacks him with a wrench, pins him to the ground and beats him to death. A close up shows the man bleeding and injured, followed by a medium long shot showing Rosetti keeping on hitting him.

Contrary to the gangster movies of the early 1930s, the link between ethnicity and violence is less obvious because gangsters are not the only violent characters.

For instance in *Lawless*, Prohibition agent Rakes is extremely violent and contrasts with the policemen in 1930s films. He resorts to torture to get information and to intimidate. The violence he performs exceeds the needs of his job and betrays his sadist and vengeful character. There is a scene when he makes one of his men spill hot tar on a bootlegger to send a message to the Bondurants. Later the man is seen covered in feathers with a sign saying bootlegger on the brothers' porch.

In a similar manner, Van Alden in *Boardwalk Empire* resorts to extreme violence although he portrays himself as an exemplary man and Prohibition agent. In season 2, episode 1 he raids a restaurant. First, he pretends to be a client who wants alcohol and when the waiter answers he can provide some to him, he punches him and breaks his nose by throwing him on the table. He then announces who he is and holds by the collar the waiter, who is kneeling, while his men search the place.

Therefore, the 1930s gangster movies link violence to ethnicity and demonstrate it implicitly contrary to recent productions which depict violence explicitly but do not necessarily link it to ethnic characters. Movies and series from the 2000s-2010s depict ethnic gangsters in a less negative light because they are not linked to pejorative stereotypes, as other characters are also capable of violence. Gangsters are portrayed as more multidimensional and sympathetic to a certain extent.
## 2- Aggressive masculinity

According to Ruth: "The underworld served up male fantasies where masculine prowess brought awesome power."<fnref n="139" /> Gangster films represent a majority of male characters and the character of the gangster became a symbol of masculinity. Classic gangster films were released during the Depression when male unemployment represented a threat to the patriarchal order. Jonathan Munby explains that one response to that threat was "the early 1930s gangster, who represented a desperate attempt at 'remasculinization' as a man who could overcome his milieu and control his destiny."<fnref n="140" /> Therefore, the movies portray a gangster who is a "tough guy whose position resulted from a commanding physical presence and exceptional prowess in the various arts of violence."<fnref n="141" /> The movies focus on the gangster's individual success and his aggressive controlling methods to reach it. Aggressive masculinity was a means to succeed in organized crime. This aggressive masculinity is often translated by "overt physicality and violence, as well as assertive language" and a desire to "eliminate cutthroat competition."<fnref n="142" />

In *Little Caesar*, this is displayed through Rico's will to succeed and control everything. Rico takes control of his rival Arnie's territory after a failed assassination attempt. Afterward, he faces Arnie to assert his authority and boast about defeating him, he humiliates him by saying: "Arnie, you oughta had better sense than to hire a couple of outside yaps! Especially bad shots. You hired these mugs, they missed. Now you're through. If you ain't out of town by tomorrow mornin', you won't never leave it except in a pine box!" Rico reveals his aggressive character by imposing his authority and power, he is intimating and menacing while remaining seated in a chair with his feet on the desk (Figure 65).

<figure><img src="image_67.png" /><figcaption>Figure 65: Rico sitting with his feet on the desk in *Little Caesar*, LeRoy, Mervyn. *Little Caesar*. 1931.</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="139">¹³⁹ David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 94.</footnote>

<footnote n="140">¹⁴⁰ Jonathan Munby, *Public Enemies, Public Heroes: Screening the Gangster from Little Caesar to touch of Evil*, Chicago, The University of Chicago press cop. 1999, 192.</footnote>

<footnote n="141">¹⁴¹ David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 93.</footnote>

<footnote n="142">¹⁴² Ron Wilson, *The Gangster Film: Fatal Success in American Cinema*, New-York: Wallflower, 2015, 39.</footnote>
In *The Public Enemy*, the audience understands Tom's aggressive masculinity in a conversation with his girlfriend, she reveals his way of reasoning when she says: "you want things and you are not content until you've got them" and "you're so strong, you don't give, you take." It shows that he is ready to go to any length to obtain what he wants and be in control of everything. In *Scarface*, Tony displays this physical presence throughout the movie, it is visible in the scene when he kills Lovo to take his place. He visits him after a failed attempt on his life because he suspects him of orchestrating it. Tony remains still and silent and stares at Lovo getting more and more nervous. Suddenly, he smashes with his bare fist the window on the door with Lovo's name on it and abruptly turns around to stare at him aggressively. He then attacks Lovo, lifts him off the ground by the collar, throws him on the couch, pushes him, and finally leaves the room to let Dino shoot him.

However, in these movies, the gangsters' masculinity is still questioned and challenged sometimes through their consumer status and sexuality. Indeed, the gangster's stylishness was seen as a sign of effeminacy: "Since the middle of the nineteenth century, shopping had been a female task, and consumer indulgence had seemed a feminine trait."<fnref n="143" /> For instance, in *Scarface*, Tony brags about his new purchases to Poppy, he enumerates the suits he bought in three different colors, his jewelry, his new car and new house, Poppy says to him: "I see you're going in for jewelry, kind of feminine isn't it?" He doesn't react to the criticism, he seems proud and excited about his shopping and continues his enumeration. This idea that the gangster's behavior is tied to femininity through consumerism and stylishness is exploited by the movie which uses it to ridicule him and undermine his masculinity. It is also hinted at in *Little Caesar* through a title card: "Rico continued to take care of himself, his hair and his gun— with excellent results." Rico is often seen combing his hair and this sentence suggests that it is as important as taking care of his gun. The gun can be seen as a symbol of masculinity and here it is put on the same level as taking care of one's appearance, which is considered as a more feminine trait.

Another aspect that challenges the gangster's masculinity relates to his sexuality. Ruth explains that: "Voyeuristic portrayals of the underworld hinted that male homosexuality was rampant in the modern city."<fnref n="144" /> For instance, in *Little Caesar*, Rico's homosexuality can be implied through his aversion to women, he doesn't have a girlfriend and doesn't seem to want one unlike Tony in *Scarface* and Tom in *The Public Enemy* who use their girlfriends to assert their masculinity. Moreover, Rico places more importance on his relationship with his gang mates, he is especially devoted to Joe. He counts on him to help him with his business but Joe wants to quit. This infuriates Rico who confesses he needs him and that he is the only one he can trust. When Joe insists on

<footnote n="143">¹⁴³ David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 90.</footnote>

<footnote n="144">¹⁴⁴ *Ibid*.</footnote>
quitting, Rico threatens to kill his girlfriend Olga, which emphasizes the fact that Rico doesn't believe in love and thinks it is only a distraction, but also that he wishes that Joe would be devoted only to him.

The gangster movies and series of the 2000s and 2010s, still portray a mostly male-dominated environment. Social changes, like the different feminist waves since the 1930s raised questions about the definition of masculinity which led to a more complex portrayal of men in gangster films. Gangsters are no longer depicted as simply trying to access riches and power by resorting to violence but are also portrayed as more vulnerable and conscious of the consequences of their violence to them and those around them. Therefore, recent productions focus more on collective masculinity rather than on an individual one. Aggressiveness is still a central aspect and a business tool. “This allows for the more aggressive masculine traits to be dispersed throughout the collective, rather than pinpointed within an individual identity, but also allows aggression to be displayed as a necessary function of survival.”<fnref n="145" />

In *Road to Perdition*, the power of aggressive collective masculinity is demonstrated by Rooney's large, powerful and influential organization. For instance, at the beginning of the movie, Rooney hosts a wake for one of his men, the house is crowded with his men and their families. Rooney makes a speech and then he invites the brother of the deceased to say a few words. The man is upset because he knows that Rooney is responsible for his brother's death and tries to stand up to him. He says to him: “You rule this town as God rules the earth, you give and you take away.” His words are exemplified by the look Connor and Michael exchange before surrounding him and escorting him out by force (Figure 66).

<figure><img src="image_68.png" /><figcaption>Figure 66: Rooney's men escorting a man out by force in *Road to Perdition*, Mendes, Sam. 2002.</figcaption></figure>

Rooney doesn't have to ask for anything, his men are ready to intervene to protect the order established in the group. The man who confronted Rooney is given the chance to get back in line,

<footnote n="145">¹⁴⁵ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 202.</footnote>
knowing that if he doesn't he will be eliminated. The aggressive collective masculinity is also highlighted when Michael loses his place in the gang although he still displays physical presence and aggressive behavior, he is helpless, alone and doesn't stand a chance against Rooney's connections and determination. He is still murdered at the end even after taking out every member of the gang who stood in his way.

In *Lawless*, there is a similar approach to masculinity, the brothers are very aggressive and look out for each other. They function as a group, they are capable of extreme violence to protect themselves, their business and their reputation. Jack is not aggressive yet he benefits from his brothers' reputations because they are a collective which helps him assert his masculinity. For instance, to avenge Forrest after his attack, Howard and Forrest torture those who are responsible, cut off their testicles and ask Jack to deliver them to Rakes. The fact that they send this body part to Rake is particularly significant, the attackers demonstrated their masculinity by being aggressive and violent toward Forrest, and as retaliation they physically deprive them of their masculinity, making them unable to ever express it again.

*Boardwalk Empire* also portrays masculinity under the spectrum of collectivity which is noticeable in the scene that predates the assassination of the D'Alessio brothers. A meeting is held by Torrio to negotiate the end of the war between Nucky and Rothstein. They come to an arrangement, Nucky asks for money and the location of the D'Alessios in exchange for using his connections to quash the indictment Rothstein is about to face because he fixed the World Series. They need each other to maintain their position in the business, which is highlighted by Rothstein's line: "We could wage war for years, it benefits no one." This scene proves that "The male community of the Mafia can project its power through asserting its unity and shared goals."<fnref n="146" /> This negotiation leads to the series of murders of the D'Alessio brothers. It shows how aggressive masculinity is spread throughout the collective and how aggression is used as a tool to survive in this environment. They handle the competition by resorting to murder and put this skill at the service of the collective, which can be made of former rivals who become temporary allies when they share a common goal. This notion is recurrent throughout the series. In *Boardwalk Empire* season 2, episode 3, Nucky asks Capone: "How's Torrio handling the competition?" to which he answers "We're killing them". They cannot let their enemies live or leave them unharmed because it gives them a chance to retaliate, win or avenge themselves. This is exemplified when Nucky spares Jimmy in the first season after he betrays him by stealing his alcohol, Jimmy takes this chance to plot against Nucky and try to replace him. It shows that just like in the 1930s movies, eliminating the competition is a means to succeed, but also that killing or aggression are necessary if they want to succeed in this business.

<footnote n="146">¹⁴⁶ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 202.</footnote>
However, recent productions also demonstrate that gangsters prioritize the collective, they protect their organization's order which guarantees their prosperity and don't systematically kill their adversaries when they can work with them and gain money and infleunce from this alliance.

### 3-Victims of the gangster's violence

In the gangster films and series, there are three main categories of victims of gangsters' violence and aggressive masculinity, which are women, children and gangsters themselves.

Women represented in 1930s gangster films are often flappers and represent the shift in women's roles that had occurred since the end of the nineteenth century.<fnref n="147" /> They were a symbol of women's emancipation in many fields, including being more active in the public world. However, women in gangster films suffer a great deal and they don't seem to be able to enjoy this freedom as they enter the male-dominated world of gangsters. This can be explained by the fact that in their work 1930s filmmakers "frequently condemned the recent evolution of gender roles."<fnref n="148" /> There is also the fact that women are put on the level of other material goods that gangsters acquire to show they are going up in the world. The gangster's success is "depicted through his acquisition of material goods: clothes, automobiles, and women."<fnref n="149" /> Therefore, they do not pay them any respect, and seem to be interested in them just because of their looks, and what they represent.

This is particularly evident in *Scarface* where Tony wants to be with Poppy because she is his boss' girlfriend and he wants to become the boss. Gangsters are responsible for the suffering of the women around them either directly or indirectly. In *The Public Enemy*, Tom is physically violent toward women, he is seen slapping a woman twice on screen, first his girlfriend and then his boss' girlfriend. In *Scarface*, Tony is also physically violent toward women, especially his sister, he has a hold on her, he gives her orders and he beats her. He acts as if he owned her and she ends up being killed because of him. Tony separates his sister from men on several occasions, first at the beginning of the movie and he tells her: "do what I say" afterward. Later when she is dancing with a man in a nightclub, Tony is infuriated and even gives her a death threat: "Next time I catch you in a place like that again I'll kill you", and he ends the conversation by slapping her violently. Tony's motivation doesn't seem to be triggered by the will to defend traditional gender values or morality. Tony's behavior toward his sister has incestuous undertones, because he seems to be jealous of the men his sister spends time with, therefore "*Scarface* casts this defender of traditional morality as an

<footnote n="147">¹⁴⁷ David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 97.</footnote>

<footnote n="148">¹⁴⁸ *Ibid*.</footnote>

<footnote n="149">¹⁴⁹ Ron Wilson, *The Gangster Film: Fatal Success in American Cinema*, New-York: Wallflower, 2015, 45.</footnote>
incestuous monster.”<fnref n="150" /> This idea seems to be confirmed by their mother when she tells Cesca: “To him, you’re just another girl.” It suggests that Tony doesn’t see Cesca as his sister but as a potential love interest. Cesca suffers from this situation which leads her to a tragic end.

In the movies and series of the 2000s and 2010s, women are still portrayed as victims of the gangster's violence, this time alongside children.

In *Road to Perdition*, the wife and son of Michael are killed toward the beginning of the movie. This event triggers the plot, the murders push Michael and his other son to flee in order to avoid suffering the same fate. To some extent, Michael's wife and son are objectified as they are used as a plot device. In *Lawless*, Maggie, the Bondurants' bar bartender and Forrest's girlfriend, suffers in this environment and is a victim of male violence. However, this violence is not engendered by gangsters, on the contrary, she is protected by the Bondurants who defend her on several occasions, even though she proves that she can protect herself. Her character demonstrates that even though a woman can be independent in a gangster film, and escape from the gangsters' physical violence and aggressive masculinity, women are still the target of other men's threats in this environment.

In *Boardwalk Empire*, all the women suffer from the gangsters' aggressive masculinity. They are exposed to violence coming from the rivals of the gangsters they are involved with. For instance, Angela is murdered in her own home by a gangster who targets Jimmy, her husband. Moreover, her girlfriend, with whom she was spending the night, is also murdered, which proves that anyone connected to gangsters, even from afar suffers from their violence. Living with gangsters comes with a heavy price for women, either their life or freedom. For instance, Margaret renounces her liberty when she moves in with Nucky. She is conscious of the risks and saves money she steals from Nucky in case she needs to run away at any moment. Margaret suffers from this situation and tries to make changes because “while he continues to dictate the terms of their relationship and to define what her role as a woman is in that relationship, she will never truly be free.”<fnref n="151" /> She takes back control over her life by leaving Nucky. In a scene, he comes back to her and offers to help her out financially and she refuses, he tells her “This is only money, it doesn’t mean anything” to which she replies: “yes it does”. Accepting the money would still connect her to him and put her at risk because of his business and grant him some power over her.

Concerning the suffering of children and young people in *Boardwalk Empire*, the character of Gillian is the most obvious example. She was raped by the Commodore at the age of thirteen and is dependent on gangsters like Nucky all her life. Her relationship with Nucky particularly highlights

<footnote n="150">¹⁵⁰ David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 101.</footnote>

<footnote n="151">¹⁵¹ Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 163.</footnote>
the implications of being close to gangsters for women. He takes her under his wing and seems to care about her but still uses her as a material good, selling her to the Commodore in exchange for power and abandoning her in a psychiatric facility when he is tired of helping her. Moreover, Gillian is drawn into the cycle of violence and commits a murder for which she is committed when Nucky gets away with hundreds of murders. The protection offered to gangsters for being part of a group does not extend to women. Jimmy and Angela's son is another victim, he is made an orphan as both his parents are killed by gangsters. The children of Margaret also suffer to a certain extent as they live under Nucky's roof, especially Teddy as he spends more time with Nucky. In season 2, episode 1, Nucky gives Teddy poor parental advice, Teddy misbehaves at school and Nucky tells him to obey his mother and his teachers, and he gives him money to buy candy. Nucky cannot teach Teddy about morality and respect, he only teaches him that everything can be bought. Furthermore, Teddy develops an obsession with fire and even starts one at school, after he witnessed Nucky burning down his father's house. Throughout the series, very young people are killed such as one of the D'Alessio brothers. In Saison 3, episode 4, Nucky shoots a barely fifteen-year-old teenager because he stole alcohol from him. In 1930s films, women suffer from the physical violence and aggressive masculinity performed by the gangsters and recent productions also portray children as victims of the gangsters' violent behavior. This evolution can be explained by the fact that gangster films and series of the 2000s-2010s convey a more nuanced portrayal of the gangsters by showing their personal life outside of their business. Gangsters are shown having families of their own, therefore, the character is in contact with children. Thus, children are potential targets of gangsters' violence as they gravitate around them contrary to gangster films of the early 1930s, which concentrated more on the consequences of crime rather than family relationships. Therefore, the character of the gangster was portrayed as more distant from traditional society. He was not portrayed as a man who aspires to have a family of his own, his priority was his success in organized crime, consequently, he is less or even not at all in contact with children.

The gangsters themselves are victims of this violence and aggressive masculinity. A vicious cycle of violence is put in place as the other gangs aspire to control their rivals' territory. Rico, Tony and Tom suffer from the violence and aggressive masculinity they make others endure. They are all victims of assassination attempts from a rival gang or their own. In *Little Caesar*, Arnie's gang attacks Rico because he encroaches on their territory. Ironically, the way they try to kill him is the way Rico puts an end to Tony's life. A car passes by and sprays the streets with bullets, hurting Rico. In *Scarface*, Tony is sprayed with bullets as soon as he steps outside of his mother's house, he runs into his car, and the shooting continues in a high-speed car chase that ends up in a car crash. In *The Public Enemy*, Matt and Tom are attacked as well as and Matt dies. Tom goes to face their attackers alone, to avenge himself and his friend and ends up severely hurt.
Furthermore, all the gangsters meet a tragic end as they are assassinated. As Annick Foucrier explains: "Their itinerary is very similar to that of an entrepreneur who wants to maintain and develop his business, except that failure is punished not by ruin or unemployment, but by his death."<fnref n="152" /> It was a way for the movies in the 1930s, to criticize gangsters and their way of life, they kill the gangster at the end in order to avoid glamorization, and to demonstrate that it is not an example to follow. This is highlighted by the fact that they are portrayed as cowards when facing their death, they are pathetic and ridiculous, which demystifies and emasculates them. Fatality is one of the themes of gangster movies since the character of the gangster is doomed to die. It is foreshadowed at the beginning of *Little Caesar* with the quotation "For all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." they are deserted by their gang mates and cannot defend themselves all alone. This is emphasized by Tom Powers' line "I ain't so tough" when he is severely hurt. He thought he would be strong enough and able to kill all these people by himself, he wrongly believed that his aggressive masculinity granted him invincibility. His death is particularly visually violent as his attackers deliver his beaten-up body tied up with ropes and fabric on his mother's doorstep. Similarly to Tom, Tony in *Scarface* admits his weakness by saying: "I'm all alone, I've got no guns," which suggests that he is harmless once ridden of his arms and men, and he begs the police for mercy by repeating "don't shoot" several times.

In *Road to Perdition*, Michael goes from gangster to victim to martyr. He suffers from the violence engendered by gangsters, as a gangster himself. He is followed by a killer the whole film, who makes several attempts on his life and injures him. The scene at the end is very similar to the scene in *The Public Enemy*, just like Tom, Michael goes to avenge himself alone, however, unlike him, he succeeds in killing everyone and comes back to his son unharmed. However, Michael still ends up being killed at the end of the movie by the killer on his trail. In the end, Michael finally arrives at their safe house on the beach, he watches his son playing by the sea through the window and lets his guard down. Suddenly, he gets shot in the back by the killer who was hiding in the room (Figure 67). Michael's fate highlights the fact that once a gangster is alone, he is no longer protected by the collective masculinity he shared with his gang mates.

<footnote n="152">¹⁵² “Leur itinéraire ressemble beaucoup à celui d’un entrepreneur qui veut maintenir et développer son entreprise, sauf que l’échec est sanctionné non par la ruine ni le chômage, mais par la mort.” Annick Foucrier, *Les Gangsters et la Société Américaine* (1920-1960), Ellipses, 2001, 35.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_69.png" /><figcaption>Figure 67: Michael getting shot in *Road to Perdition*, Mendes, Sam. *Road to Perdition*. 2002.</figcaption></figure>

In *Lawless*, the Bondurants' life is repeatedly threatened, especially Forrest's. He is severely hurt and on the verge of death twice, the first time his attackers slit his throat, and at the end, during the final battle, he is shot several times. Contrary to the other movies and series, the main characters survive. This exception can be explained by the fact that the brothers are small-town gangsters who have few rivals and eliminate Rakes, the only man who presented a threat to them. Moreover, they never part and always protect each other because they use the collective masculinity they established to their advantage, unlike Michael Sullivan. This allows them to survive through Prohibition and go back to normal life afterward. In *Boardwalk Empire*, the series ends with Nucky's death, he is shot in the streets while walking alone on the boardwalk. However, he is not killed by a rival gang or his own, his killer is none other than Jimmy's son, who has grown up. He shoots Nucky twice before aiming at his cheek, which is reminiscent of how Nucky killed Jimmy. A close up of Nucky shows his face bleeding (Figure 68).

<figure><img src="image_70.png" /><figcaption>Figure 68: close up of Nucky's face after getting shot in *Boardwalk Empire*, season 5, episode 8, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terence, HBO, *Boardwalk Empire*. 2014.</figcaption></figure>

Like Michael in *Road to Perdition*, Nucky knew he would die eventually because of his lifestyle but didn't expect to be killed at this moment. Contrary to the gangsters in 1930s films, they do not act like cowards and beg for their lives, instead, they are surprised and resigned. Moreover, they are not
ambushed and killed by policemen but die at the hand of their enemies. Larke-Walsh explains that: “The gangster's eventual demise is shown to be a direct result of his over-indulgent lifestyle, not a restrictive justice or social system.”<fnref n="153" /> Therefore the gangster’s fate is not motivated by the will to criticize and punish criminality on screen, like in 1930s films, but he is stopped because he is insatiable and uncontrollable. Moreover, recent productions choose this fate for the gangsters to put an end to the cathartic fantasy of extreme wealth and power they allowed the viewers to experience. The productions from the 1930s and 2000s-2010s show that the gangsters are victims of the violence they engender, which is highlighted by similarities between the way they killed other gangsters and got killed themselves. Films from the 1930s focus on the individuality of the gangsters who try to succeed alone and die alone, whereas recent productions focus on collectivity and show that the gangsters who are no longer protected by the group are bound to die.

## C- Nostalgic representation of gangsters

In this part, I shall analyze the different ways in which the representation of the character of the gangster is nostalgic in both movies and series of the 1930s and 2000s-2010s. I will start by demonstrating that the gangster is a nostalgic character inspired by historical figures. Then, I will dwell upon the ways ethnicity is used as a nostalgic device. Finally, I will analyze the nostalgia triggered by the portrayal of violence on screen and the representation of aggressive masculinity.

### 1- A nostalgic character

As mentioned in the first part of this paper, the gangster films of the early 1930s mainly drew their inspiration from newspapers and exploited current big news. Therefore, the main characters of these films also came from the news. They were reinvented as fictional characters reflecting the reality of the time. Indeed, as Annick Foucrier said: “The gangsters are based on real cases, but recreated as cinematic types.”<fnref n="154" /> Indeed this cycle of movies established the archetypes of the racketeer during the Depression-era, based on real-life gangsters. One of the most notorious gangsters of the time was “Al Capone who was prominent in newspapers since the St. Valentine’s Day massacre in 1929 and named ‘Public Enemy #1’ by the Chicago Crime Commission on 23

<footnote n="153">¹⁵³ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 52.</footnote>

<footnote n="154">¹⁵⁴ “Les gangsters sont élaborés a partir de cas réels mais recrées comme des types cinématographiques.”
Annick Foucrier, *Les Gangsters et la Société Américaine* (1920-1960), Ellipses, 2001, 116.</footnote>
April 1930.”<sup>155</sup> Naturally, most of the films drew their inspiration from him because “fascination with Capone produced the most vivid and widely disseminated portrait of the gangster in twentieth-century American culture.”<sup>156</sup> Films like *Little Caesar* and *Scarface* took advantage of this public fascination for Al Capone (Figure 69) and used his recognizable physique, character and actions to add to their credibility. Moreover, the use of this public figure also created a sense of nostalgia since the films came out after Al Capone’s arrest in 1931 while their plot recalled his beginnings and the peak of his career. This is the same form of nostalgia as the one used to portray Prohibition which created a longing for the lost abundance before the Depression. Capone’s fictional counterpart is named Caesar Enrico Bandello (Figure 70) in *Little Caesar* and Tony Camonte (Figure 71) in *Scarface*.

<figure><img src="image_71.png" /><figcaption>Figure 69: two “mug shots” of Al Capone, half-length portraits, one facing front, the other facing right, 1931. Library of Congress.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_72.png" /><figcaption>Figure 70: Rico Bandello in *Little Caesar*, LeRoy, Mervyn. *Little Caesar*. 1931.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_73.png" /><figcaption>Figure 71: Tony Camonte in *Scarface*, Hawks, Howard. *Scarface*. 1932.</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="155"><sup>155</sup> Ron Wilson, *The Gangster Film: Fatal Success in American Cinema*, New-York: Wallflower, 2015, 41.</footnote>

<footnote n="156"><sup>156</sup> David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 118.</footnote>
In Figure 69 and Figure 70, we can notice the physical resemblance between the actors who played Rico and Al Capone, they both have dark hair, prominent eyebrows and a round face. The actor who plays Tony bears a less obvious physical resemblance to Capone, his face is thinner and more elongated, but he still has dark hair and large eyebrows and of course a scar on his left cheek like Al Capone. It is important to note that Ben Hecht, a former Chicago Daily News columnist wrote the screenplay of *Scarface*, which emphasizes the fact that fact and fiction are intertwined in the genre. Indeed "though Al Capone lived in the realm of flesh and blood, for most Americans he existed only as a cultural invention."<fnref n="157" /> The title of the movie bears one of the famous nicknames of Al Capone and the actor has a large scar on his face, which explicitly reveals that the film draws its inspiration from Capone's life. According to Capone, he earned this nickname when he received his scar during the war, but it is also rumored it was obtained during a knife duel with the brother of a girl to whom he had paid a compliment deemed offensive.<fnref n="158" /> Moreover, the movie can easily be traced back to Al Capone as it incorporates several real events such as the Saint Valentine Day's massacre, which took place on February 14, 1929, at 10:30 a.m., in a garage. Seven men who were part of the Irish gang of George 'Bugs' Moran, Al Capone's rivals, were waiting for a delivery of contraband liquor. Four men, two of whom were wearing police uniforms ordered them to line up in front of the wall, shot them and left.<fnref n="159" /> *Scarface* portrays the event faithfully, it occurs on Valentine's Day, as one of the attackers announces: "They're bringing you a valentine. Don't you know it's Valentine's Day?" and the investigators later declare that two of the assailants were dressed as policemen. The seven victims are lined up against the wall and killed with a Tommy gun. The fidelity with which the event is recreated triggers a feeling of nostalgia because it brings the 1930s audience back to this pre-Depression hypermediated moment. This nostalgia for the media coverage of gangsters' achievements is directly addressed by the films. In *Little Caesar*, a scene shows Rico proudly buying a newspaper with his picture on the front page. *Scarface* hints at the media's and the public's fascination for gangsters during a conversation between a journalist and a policeman. The journalist tells the policeman: "This fellow, Camonte [...] the public's interested in him. He's a colorful character." to which the policeman responds bitterly: "Colorful? What colors are crawling louse? Say, this is the attitude of too many morons in this country. They think these big hoodlums are some sort of demi-gods." The term demi-gods highlights the disproportionate interest given to gangsters by the public and media. Alongside Al Capone, Dion O'Bannion is another gangster who was used as an inspiration to create the prototype of the gangster in classic films. Dion O'Bannion (Figure

<footnote n="157">157 David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 119.</footnote>

<footnote n="158">158 Annick Foucrier, *Les Gangsters et la Société Américaine* (1920-1960), Ellipses, 2001, 53.</footnote>

<footnote n="159">159 *Ibid*, 7.</footnote>
72) was Al Capone's rival and was often mentioned in newspapers such as *The Chicago Tribune* or *The Chicago Herald*. *Scarface* uses a counterpart called O'Hara, a name reminiscent of O'Bannion's and of Irish ethnicity, who serves as an antagonist to Tony Camonte. The film refers to the character's murder, in similar circumstances as its real-life alter ego, when Poppy tells Tony: "They tell me O'Hara was killed in his flower shop this morning", to which he reacts angrily, showing that he is involved. O'Bannion more prominently inspired *The Public Enemy*. Annick Foucrier explains that "His character as an Irish gangster serves as a model for the roles played in the cinema by James Cagney"<fnref n="160" /> which can be seen through the character of Tom Powers (Figure 73) in *The Public Enemy*.

<figure><img src="image_74.png" /><figcaption>Figure 72: Dion O'Bannion. The Mob Museum</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_75.png" /><figcaption>Figure 73: Tom Powers in *The Public Enemy*, Wellman, William. *The Public Enemy*. 1931.</figcaption></figure>

Tom Powers does not resemble Dion O'Bannion physically except for the light hair, however, they are both from Irish backgrounds. They both participated in organized crime in Chicago and they both trafficked alcohol during the period of Prohibition. They are both in conflict with rival gangs which caused their tragic death. Tom is killed by his enemies and his body is delivered to his family whereas Dion was assassinated by his rivals in his flower shop in 1924. Similarly to Capone's representation in *Scarface* and *Little Caesar*, O'Bannion's counterparts in *The Public Enemy* and *Scarface* trigger a sense of nostalgia for the Pre-Depression, when these gangsters were at the height of their success and when businessmen, even in criminal activities, prospered.

In the gangster films of the beginning of the 20th century, the main characters were always inspired by real-life gangsters who were notorious at the time. They were reinvented as fictional characters and reflected the reality of the time. However, they also contributed to deforming it since they shaped the gangsters represented to match an prototype and resorted to nostalgia to appeal to an audience longing for the recent past.

<footnote n="160">¹⁶⁰ “Son personnage de gangster irlandais sert de modèle aux rôle joués au cinéma par James Cagney.” Annick Foucrier, *Les Gangsters et la Société Américaine* (1920-1960), Ellipses, 2001, 51.</footnote>
Contrary to 1930s films, in movies and series of the beginning of the 21st century the main characters are generally direct portrayals of the gangsters of the Prohibition period since the characters bear the gangsters' real names. However, the gangsters portrayed in the earlier films are still very much present in the recent ones and they still fascinate the viewers today as Greg Littmann says: "Crime bosses like Capone, Luciano, 'Nucky' Johnson continue to intrigue us almost a century after their height of power."<fnref n="161" /> Therefore, recent productions voluntarily resort to nostalgia by portraying the same gangsters as 1930s films. Matthew Leggatt describes "the twenty-first century as a time uniquely predisposed toward nostalgia: a product of the inadequacies of our present and the failed promises of neoliberal capitalism."<fnref n="162" /> The dissatisfaction with the present explains the growing popularity of period pieces, especially those portraying characters who seem to effortlessly reach fame and fortune, like gangster films.

In *Lawless* Al Capone is mentioned several times even though the story is not centered around him, and his character is not represented in the film. For instance, at the beginning of the movie Jack sets the context of the movie during Prohibition and cites the name of gangsters, among which is Al Capone's: "Gangsters were just scooping money off the streets like candy, big men like Al Capone, Tommy Malloy, Mad Dog Floyd Banner, they just moved in and took over." In *Boardwalk Empire*, Al Capone (Figure 74) is one of the recurrent characters. It emphasizes the influence of the classical gangster film, but also the influence of Capone himself and the series' nostalgic aspect.

<figure><img src="image_76.png" /><figcaption>Figure 74: two shots of Al Capone, one facing front, the other facing left, in *Boardwalk Empire*, season 3, episode 1, Van Patten, Tim and season 2, episode 8, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terence, HBO, *Boardwalk Empire*. 2012.</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="161">161 Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 3.</footnote>

<footnote n="162">162 Matthew, Leggatt, *What is Yesterday?: Nostalgia in Contemporary Film and Television*, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2021, 4.</footnote>
Al Capone valued his public image and “worked as any movie star to create a favorable public image”<fnref n="163" /> so much so that he paid reporters to manipulate public perception, his “idea was that everybody reads the newspaper, and most people are stupid enough to believe what’s written in the newspapers.”<fnref n="164" /> In fact, the series *Boardwalk Empire* refers to this in season 4, episode 1, Al Capone reads an article in which his name is spelled wrong. He is offended and angry whereas the others seem to believe it is better if he remains incognito. Capone considers that he is not insignificant and deserves to be known under his real name. A little later in the episode, we see him attacking the journalist and threatening him until he knows how to spell his name right, and he tells him “Now you know.” In episode 6, season 1, Jimmy embarrasses Al publicly by implying that he may not have received his scar during the war. He says ironically “hand-to-hand with the Kaiser himself. That is how you got your scars, right, Al?” The real Al Capone and the filmmakers of the movies of the 1930s created a very proud figure obsessed with his public image. This depiction remained across time and became a cliché that can be nostalgic. In *Boardwalk Empire*, Capone displays his pride with even more fervor, which is visible through several scenes. In season 5, episode 2, he is asked if he has seen the movies *The Public Enemy* and *Little Caesar*, which on the one hand incorporates in the series one of its sources of influence and reminds the audience of the nostalgia they feel for those films as they were released in the 1930s, and on the other hand, the scene adds to the Capone legend, as it shows that he enjoys watching films which depict himself. This is even more visible in episode 4 of the same season, as he is in his hotel room watching along with all his men a documentary of himself, and as soon as it ends he asks to rewatch it again (Figure 75). This scene is a mise en abyme that plunges viewers into the past and the lives of Capone’s contemporaries.

<figure><img src="image_77.png" /><figcaption>Figure 75: Capone watching his documentary in *Boardwalk Empire*, season 5, episode 4, Paltrow, Jake, Winter, Terence, HBO, *Boardwalk Empire*. 2014.</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="163">¹⁶³ David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 119.</footnote>

<footnote n="164">¹⁶⁴ Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 108.</footnote>
The genre of the series is a historical docudrama as Rod Carveth explains in chapter 5 of *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*. Therefore the series shows a will to be as accurate as possible while remaining entertaining and accessible:

> While they are not documentaries, docudramas have an ethical obligation to depict the facts that are important to historical events. In order to facilitate telling a good story, a certain amount of creative license is often taken. The problem is that this creative license can lead to a distortion of the history that is being portrayed.<fnref n="165" />

However, there are instances when for the sake of a good narrative the timeline is not respected, dialogues are invented, characters are composites of several people and even certain events are invented. This can lead the audience to confuse fiction with facts: “The problem is that what viewers learn may be a misrepresentation of reality.”<fnref n="166" /> The series depicts the life of Al Capone accurately by showing that he owes his rise to profits made from bootlegging during Prohibition. It shows that at the beginning of Prohibition, Al Capone was just an employee working for Torrio until 1925, when Torrio retired and bequeathed Capone the criminal operation. However, the series also diverts from reality by changing a few elements, such as the physical appearance of Capone, the character is much shorter,<fnref n="167" /> except for his scar on the left cheek which is accurately recreated. There are also inaccuracies about the number of times Capone visited Atlantic City and his relationship with Enoch: “Capone biographer Johnathan Big suggests it is highly unlikely that Capone had much of a relationship with Nucky.”<fnref n="168" />

In recent productions, there is a tendency to put forward less-known gangsters such as the Bondurants in *Lawless* or Enoch Johnson (Figure 76) in *Boardwalk Empire*. The character of Nucky (Figure 77) is based on the real New Jersey politician Enoch L. Johnson, who was the sheriff and county treasurer of Atlantic City between 1911 and 1941. In this case, nostalgia can be triggered by the technique Sperb referred to as “stars vehicles”, which refers here to an established actor, Steve Buscemi. The audience recalls all the movies this star starred in, and feels nostalgic about all the previous roles he used to build this new character. As Larke-Walsh adds “the continual appearance

<footnote n="165">¹⁶⁵ Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 68.</footnote>

<footnote n="166">¹⁶⁶ Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 68.</footnote>

<footnote n="167">¹⁶⁷ *Ibid*, 71.</footnote>

<footnote n="168">¹⁶⁸ *Ibid*.</footnote>
of particular stars in films becomes a major factor in the recognition of genre as a coherent form.”<fnref n="169" />

For instance, Steve Buscemi starred in *Reservoir Dogs* and *Fargo* in which he plays criminals as well as *The Sopranos* in which he plays a gangster. Buscemi’s casting for nostalgic reasons is made obvious by the fact he doesn’t resemble the real Nucky who was physically much taller, more muscular than him, who has a smaller stature.<fnref n="170" /> The showrunner decided to change the real name of Nucky Johnson to Nucky Thompson because he did not want the audience to know how the story was going to end before watching it, he “was afraid that, if people started to Google the real Nucky Johnson, they would [get] ahead of the story’s and they would know what became of Nucky or when did he live and die or what he did or didn’t do.”<fnref n="171" /> Changing the name of Nucky creates an alter ego that exists only in the gangster series, exactly like Caesar Bandello, Tony Camonte, and Tom Powers, in *Little Caesar*, *Scarface* and *The Public Enemy*. The invention of a fictional double for Nucky can be a reference to the classic gangster films by perpetuating what was done, that is to say, the depiction of a fictional gangster who was clearly inspired by a real-life one or it can also suggest that the series will share a loose adaption of Nucky Johnson’s life. Indeed, there are similarities such as his wife’s death early in their marriage, and the fact that he had an active social life, “Nucky Johnson liked socializing and living large, eating and drinking in Atlantic City’s nightclubs and restaurants, freely spending, employing maids and drivers and tipping bid as a matter of habit.”<fnref n="172" /> In the series, his headquarters are located in the Ritz Carlton Hotel, whereas the hotel was not opened until 1921, a year and a half after the beginning of the series.

<footnote n="169">¹⁶⁹ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 91.</footnote>

<footnote n="170">¹⁷⁰ Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 74.</footnote>

<footnote n="171">¹⁷¹ Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 77.</footnote>

<footnote n="172">¹⁷² *Ibid*, 74.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_78.png" /><figcaption>Figure 76: Enoch Jonhson. The Mob Museum</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_79.png" /><figcaption>Figure 77: Enoch Thompson in *Boardwalk Empire*, season 1, episode 1, Scorsese, Martin, Winter, Terrence, HBO, *Boardwalk Empire*. 2010.</figcaption></figure>

The series also depicts several other real historical figures such as Big Jim Colosimo, Arnold Rothstein, Charles 'Lucky' Luciano, Meyer Lansky, Salvatore Maranzano and Joe Massaria. Their portrayal is mainly accurate, despite chronological alterations and simplifications that favor the plot developments. The depiction of all the characters in the series resonates with one of Nucky's first lines: "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story", which I discussed earlier in the dissertation. In this instance, the "good story" is told through a nostalgic lens.

## 2- Ethnicity as nostalgia

Ethnicity can also be a tool for nostalgia, as we can notice that almost a century later, the ethnicities represented in the more recent gangster films and series are the same as in gangster movies of the early 1930s. In the 1930s the representation of these ethnicities was not nostalgic, instead, they tried to define "others" and true America. However, today the "Mafia is viewed in the past tense, as a dying tribe: at once powerful, romantic and dangerous, but rendered safe by their separateness from ordinary society and their confinement to the past."<fnref n="173" /> Therefore, the movies and series of the 2000s-2010s convey a nostalgic representation of gangsters as they portray ethnic gangsters from the 1920s and early 1930s, especially since they portray gangsters from the same ethnicities, evolving in the same time period. The films seem to want to revive the memory of these ethnic gangsters when they were not yet assimilated and still viewed as dangerous. However, contrary to 1930s films, recent productions express their will to restore the image of gangsters, by portraying them in a more positive light or at least a more neutral one, as a means to celebrate their

<footnote n="173">¹⁷³ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 155.</footnote>
ethnicities and create a sense of belonging for their modern audience, some of which share the same heritage.

Nostalgia for these ethnicities is expressed through dialogue, which is one of the markers used to recognize them. As Larke-Walsh explains, recent productions' screenwriters describe their film's dialogue as authentic yet it seems impossible to him to recreate accurately the language used by a secret society since the testimonies are bound to be incomplete or altered to fit the image this community wishes to convey. Therefore, the dialogue in the films is largely based on myth, the myth elaborated by the Mafia and the myth shaped by previous movies. Moreover, the two seem to have overlapped, tying reality tightly to fiction: "It is evident that after a whole century of Hollywood film it is likely that many real-life Mafia members may have adopted some of the dialogue witnessed on screen."<fnref n="174" /> This is something recent productions address directly, for instance in *Boardwalk Empire*, when Capone is asked if he has seen *Little Caesar* and *The Public Enemy*. He expresses his fondness for the movies and is later seen watching a documentary on his life, showing his interest in shaping his public image that may be inspired by the films he enjoyed. Therefore, the dialogue used in recent productions is nostalgic since it mimics the one used in 1930s films, whether directly, as a reference or homage, or indirectly, by taking inspiration from sources influenced by 1930s films. For instance, the word "boss" is used in gangster films from the early 1930s to designate the leader of the gang several times. In *Little Caesar*, during the fitting scene Rico is called "boss" by one of his men and in *Scarface*, Tony visits Lovo and calls him "boss". In recent productions, the word "boss" is still used with the same meaning. In *Lawless*, toward the beginning, a man asks Forrest: "You the Boss?" and in *Boardwalk Empire*, Season 1, episode 6, during a meeting Franck Hague, the mayor of New Jersey, says "Bosses like us", referring to Nucky and himself. Throughout the series, the word boss is frequently used to designate gang leaders, like Masseria who is nicknamed "The Boss".

As Larke-Walsh explains: “history can take the place of ethnicity as the focus of distanciation.”¹⁷⁵As the narratives of recent productions are confined to the past, it encourages nostalgic views on gangsters’ behavior for instance. The gangsters portrayed in recent gangster films and series do not necessarily share the same gestures as their 1930s counterparts as I explained earlier, however, what remains is their aggressive, menacing attitude. Gangsters are still portrayed as committing horrible acts of violence that trigger nostalgia which I will develop in the following part. In the 1930s, the viewer could not feel nostalgia or sympathy for ethnic gangsters because the story was set too close to the period of its release and people of these ethnicities were still perceived

<footnote n="174">¹⁷⁴ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 74.</footnote>

<footnote n="175">¹⁷⁵ *Ibid*, 213.</footnote>
as “others”. Today the viewer feels nostalgic while distancing oneself through history and ethnicity: “Audiences are encouraged to envy the mythical ethnic unity, while simultaneously denouncing the barbarity of it.”<fnref n="176" /> These distancing devices allow the viewer to watch scenes in which the main character does unspeakable things while still feeling sympathy for him. The audience is free from guilt because the story is set in the past. For instance, in *Road to Perdition*, in one scene the audience watches Michael Sullivan killing people, and in the next scene, sees him spending quality time with his son. There is also a scene when they learn to know each other, and Michael opens up and confesses to his son: “You were more like me, and I didn’t want you to be”. This line shows Michael’s moral values, he is aware that what he does is wrong but does it to offer his son a better life. This exchange reveals his motivation and seems to justify his actions, which can lead the audience to feel sympathy for Michael. Similarly, in *Boardwalk Empire*, Capone is generally portrayed as very impulsive and violent, but he is also portrayed in very touching and moving scenes with his son. For instance, in Season 5, episode 8, Capone explains to his son that he will have to leave for a while because he is in trouble, and he tells him that everything he does is for him, to offer him a better life. This shows a different facet of the character, he is more vulnerable, gentle, calm and serious. The scene ends with him and his son hugging. This can also encourage the viewer today to romanticize the figure of Capone. This kind of scene reveals the humanity of the gangsters and creates closeness between them and the viewer which accentuates the feeling of nostalgia since it mirrors the idea of feeling connected to something distant in time.

In addition to portraying gangsters of the same ethnicities as the ones in 1930s films, *Boardwalk Empire* introduces gangsters from ethnic backgrounds that were erased from these films and underrepresented since. For instance, the show established Black gangsters as protagonists, like Chalky White, or antagonists, like Valentin Narcisse. The series demonstrates the capacity of modern nostalgia “to initiate critical reconsiderations of the past, to tap into previously overlooked experiences.”<fnref n="177" /> Therefore nostalgic productions that portray the past can also represent aspects of this past, like certain communities that were not integrated in previous works.

As I studied in the part on the representation of gangsters’ ethnicities, one of the ethnic markers is the gangster’ costume. Moreover, I mentioned in the part on the nostalgic representation of Prohibition the theory of Sperb on the “representational form of nostalgia” which evokes nostalgia for a time and place and can be triggered by the reproduction of costumes for instance. Indeed, *Road to Perdition*, *Lawless*, and *Boardwalk Empire* use this form of nostalgia as they

<footnote n="176">¹⁷⁶ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 213.</footnote>

<footnote n="177">¹⁷⁷ Matthew, Leggatt, *What is Yesterday?: Nostalgia in Contemporary Film and Television*, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2021, 36.</footnote>
portray ethnic characters wearing Prohibition-era costumes. Today, when the viewers see these costumes, they can recognize the profession of the characters which is often connected to their ethnicities. Therefore, the costumes also function as a genre signifier, “a signifier that is traceable across films and encourages the reading of some crime films [...] as gangster films, mainly because of such iconographic inclusions.”<sup>178</sup> Therefore, the recreation of similar costumes from the 1930s movies in recent productions triggers nostalgia. For instance, a similar dark suit with straps to the one worn by Rico in *Little Caesar* (Figure 78) or Tom in *The Public Enemy* (Figure 79) can be seen worn by Floyd Banner in *Lawless* (Figure 80) and Nucky in *Boardwalk Empire* (Figure 81).

<figure><img src="image_80.png" /><figcaption>Figure 78: Rico's dark suit with stripes in *Little Caesar*, LeRoy, Mervyn. *Little Caesar*. 1931.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_81.png" /><figcaption>Figure 79: Tom's dark suit with stripes in *The Public Enemy*, Wellman, William. *The Public Enemy*. 1931.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_82.png" /><figcaption>Figure 80: Floyd's dark suit with stripes in *Lawless*, Hillcoat, John. *Lawless*. 2012.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_83.png" /><figcaption>Figure 81: Nucky's dark suit with stripes in *Boardwalk Empire*, season 3, episode 1, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terrence, HBO, *Boardwalk Empire*. 2011.</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="178"><sup>178</sup> George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 71.</footnote>
Furthermore, the nostalgia for a past era and classic gangster films is evoked through the recreation of scenes such as the costumes fitting, found in *Little Caesar* (Figure 82) and *The Public Enemy* (Figure 83).

In *Boardwalk Empire*, season 1, episode 4, the viewer witnesses Capone's first costume fitting, this scene marks his wardrobe change to a more fashionable and expensive one, and his rise in organized crime (Figure 84). Since the 1930s, it seems to have become a primordial scene in the portrayal of Capone and even any other gangster. This scene is a direct reference to the classic gangster films and remains faithful to the depiction of Capone put in place at the time.

<figure><img src="image_84.png" /><figcaption>Figure 82: Rico's costume fitting in *Little Caesar*, LeRoy, Mervyn. *Little Caesar*. 1931.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_85.png" /><figcaption>Figure 83: Tom's costume fitting in *The Public Enemy*, Wellman, William. *The Public Enemy*. 1931.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_86.png" /><figcaption>Figure 84: Al's costume fitting in *Boardwalk Empire*, season 1, episode 4, Podeswa, Jeremy, Winter, Terrence, HBO, *Boardwalk Empire*. 2010.</figcaption></figure>
## 3 - A nostalgic portrayal of violence and aggressive masculinity

Another aspect of gangster films that can be viewed as nostalgic is the representation of violence. Gangster films from the 1930s dealt with a subject that required portraying violence on screen, which worried the public and moral guardians. As Munby explains “fear of these films rested, instead, on these films’ potential for glamorization of crime.”<sup>179</sup> These fears led to the establishment of heavy censorship of the movies including on the depiction of violence. However, these movies still triggered a fascination and glamorization of crime among audiences especially young people even though violence was generally implicit. Indeed, as Wilson mentions, a study called the Payne Fund Studies (1929-33) was conducted to show the influence of gangster films especially regarding the depiction of crime on screen, the testimonies often mention the fascination for the gangster’s lifestyle and the educational aspect of crime in these films. For instance, one young man admitted that “watching gangster pictures created the desire “to always have plenty of money, ride around in swell machines, wear good clothes, and grab a girl whenever you wanted - I still think it would be a great life.””<sup>180</sup>

Recent productions perpetuated the representation of violence initiated by 1930s films, especially since the loosening of censorship permitted a more explicit portrayal. Today violence is a trademark in the genre and is expected by the audience. Modern gangster films and series participate in the romanticization and glamorization of crime already established in 1930s gangster films. Productions from the 2000s-2010s can give a nostalgic feeling to the representation of violence by paying homage to 1930s films by recreating or emulating scenes of violence in the same aesthetic way. However, the portrayal of violence in recent productions derives from 1930s films and is unrealistic because of its overrepresentation and aestheticization. As Wilson analyses: “In contemporary historic gangster films these action sequences become more stylized and hyper-realistic through their use of screen violence.”<sup>181</sup>

*Road to Perdition* is the film of the corpus that seems the closest to the 1930s movies in many aspects including its representation of violence. The film is much more graphic and explicit in its depiction of violence, but as I mentioned in the analysis of Connor's murder, some aspects are reminiscent of the way violence was depicted under censorship, like when he is murdered off-screen. The scene when Michael shoots his gang feels very aesthetic as well (Figure 85). The

<footnote n="179"><sup>179</sup> Jonathan Munby, *Public Enemies, Public Heroes: Screening the Gangster from Little Caesar to touch of Evil*, Chicago, The University of Chicago press cop. 1999, 24.</footnote>

<footnote n="180"><sup>180</sup> Ron Wilson, *The Gangster Film: Fatal Success in American Cinema*, New-York: Wallflower, 2015, 49.</footnote>

<footnote n="181"><sup>181</sup> *Ibid*,</footnote>
violence is undermined by the fact that the viewer can't hear the noise of the machine gun, it is covered by peaceful music. The scene shows that the noise of gunshots, which was one of the only indicators of violence in the older movies, is not indispensable anymore because it is engraved in the audience's mind. This is one of the scenes that highlights the nostalgic nature of the film, whose goal is to appeal to the collective memory of gangster's iconography: "As most reviews agree, the success of the film (Road to Perdition) is achieved through aesthetics rather than narrative."<fnref n="182" />

<figure><img src="image_87.png" /><figcaption>Figure 85: The shooting scene in *Road to Perdition*, Mendes, Sam. *Road to Perdition*. 2002.</figcaption></figure>

In *Lawless*, the romanticization of crime is particularly noticeable through the character of Jack. He is the protagonist and therefore the character the audience is supposed to identify with, which gives away the nostalgic intention of the film since he is attracted to the gangster's way of life and romanticizes it. His character is reminiscent of the fear of the gangster's influence on young people because Jack is drawn to the notorious gangster lifestyle, probably for the same reasons mentioned in the testimonies I quoted earlier. For instance, the audience can witness Jack's fascination for gangsters when he picks up bullets on the floor which are still warm and come from Floyd Banner's Tommy gun (Figure 86). The scene of the shooting is also a great example of the nostalgic and aesthetic portrayal of violence in recent gangster films. The scene is shown from Jack's point of view, he shares his fascination and amazement with the audience. He witnesses a car chase between Banner and one of his rivals. Banner drives into town and waits for the other car to arrive, then walks confidently toward it with his Tommy gun and shoots until the car stops and the driver and passengers collapse. The shooting is reminiscent of the confrontation scenes from 1930s films discussed earlier. In addition, the film uses the same technique as 1930s gangster films, which emphasized sound with the screeches of tires and the noise of gunshots (Figure 87). The recreation of scenes from previous gangster films can be considered as nostalgic. Sperb states that "figurative

<footnote n="182">¹⁸² George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 52.</footnote>
and actual reenactments are also a reoccurring element in nostalgic plots”<fnref n="183" />, which is true within one film, but more importantly within the entirety of gangster films since “they can be viewed as a continuous text that perpetuates Mafia mythologies.”<fnref n="184" />

<figure><img src="image_88.png" /><figcaption>Figure 86: Jack picking up bullets on the floor in *Lawless*, Hillcoat, John. *Lawless*. 2012.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_89.png" /><figcaption>Figure 87: Floyd shooting a car in *Lawless*, Hillcoat, John. *Lawless*. 2012.</figcaption></figure>

Similar scenes are also shown in *Boardwalk Empire*, one of them happens in season 5, episode 5. A car drives by the restaurant where Nucky and Maranzano are meeting and shoots through the window (Figure 88). They barely manage to hide and survive the bullets. This scene appears to be a pastiche of a scene in *Scarface*. Sperb explains that the imitation and aestheticization of the past and scenes in movies from the past can be viewed as nostalgic: “Nostalgia is defined textually through assumptions about style—the aesthetic looks of the past (pastiche) become synonymous with the past itself.”<fnref n="185" /> Tony is eating in a restaurant with his date while one of his men is on the phone and the others are watching over them. Several cars drive by and gun down the front window while they throw themselves on the ground (Figure 89).

<footnote n="183">¹⁸³ Matthew, Leggatt, *What is Yesterday?: Nostalgia in Contemporary Film and Television*, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2021, 23.</footnote>

<footnote n="184">¹⁸⁴ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 2.</footnote>

<footnote n="185">¹⁸⁵ Matthew, Leggatt, *What is Yesterday?: Nostalgia in Contemporary Film and Television*, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2021, 31.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_90.png" /><figcaption>Figure 88: a car driving by and gunning down the front window aiming at Nucky in *Boardwalk Empire*, season 5, episode 5, Bianchi, Ed, Winter, Terrence, HBO, *Boardwalk Empire*. 2014.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_91.png" /><figcaption>Figure 89: cars driving by and gunning down the front window aiming at Tony in *Scarface*, Hawks, Howard. *Scarface*. 1931.</figcaption></figure>

The recreation of scenes from classic gangster films can trigger a feeling of nostalgia for these films and the way violence used to be portrayed in them. Recent productions depict more violence of a growing intensity which contrasts with scenes like the ones analyzed above which recall the original way of depicting violence, which was more implicit. Thus, recent productions alternate scenes expressing nostalgia for an implicit representation of violence and scenes portraying violence more explicitly and graphically way which tend to deform reality. In *Boardwalk Empire*, the real Nucky Johnson did not use violence as a tool contrary to what is portrayed in the series, indeed "It was organized crime, but without the violence."<fnref n="186" /> Instead, Nucky used the threat of economic ruin on his opponents, they "lost their government jobs, they were ostracized, their business not patronized, their operating licenses were pulled, or they were raided and shut down by complicit police."<fnref n="187" /> The series portrays a distorted image of Atlantic City in the 1920s as a place overwhelmed by the violence engendered by Nucky's organization.

The final nostalgic aspect noticeable in gangster films concerns the portrayal of aggressive masculinity. This aspect is tied to violence and its nostalgic appeal is present in both 1930s films and 2000s-2010s productions. Films from the 1930s were already nostalgic for a past expression of masculinity endangered and diminished by the unemployment wave engendered by the Depression which only survived through the gangster figure. The portrayal of Al Capone in the gangster films of the 1930s put forward the link between aggressive masculinity and gangsters. As Ruth explains: "Capone's inventors proclaimed that aggressive masculinity and modern business organization

<footnote n="186">¹⁸⁶ Richard, Greene, *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013, 43.</footnote>

<footnote n="187">¹⁸⁷ *Ibid*.</footnote>
could coexist.”<fnref n="188" /> Filmmakers depicted Capone’s fictional double as a man who savagely kills for his own pleasure whereas Capone considered himself a businessman and delegated acts of violence to his men, Capone was “a shrewd, brainy, quick thinking, cool tempered man. No desperado of the old school is ‘Scarface Al’, plundering or murdering for the savage joy of crime.” Therefore, the figure of Capone became culturally significant. In the movies from the 1930s, he represents stylish consumption, the rise of gangsters from the streets to organized crime, aggressive masculinity as a business tool and individual success and it establishes “a nostalgic memory of the Prohibition-era as a ‘lawless decade’ where criminal entrepreneurial efforts flourished as a part of American society.”<fnref n="189" />

Recent productions share this nostalgia for former gender roles and expression of masculinity. The films and series use the same archetypes as previous movies. *Boardwalk Empire* uses the same historical figures as in 1930s films, like Al Capone who became a symbol of aggressive masculinity. In *Road to Perdition*, the depiction of Michael Sullivan's masculinity is different from the one of gangsters from the 1930s films as developed earlier. Yet, he still embodies one aspect of this ideal of individualistic masculinity by being able to survive outside his group long enough to fulfill his revenge thanks to his strength and determination. In addition, recent productions are nostalgic in their representation of collective aggressive masculinity. Rooney's gang, Nucky's gang and the Bondurants embody this nostalgic masculinity that relies on the feeling of belonging to a group resorting to aggressiveness to protect each other. These movies and series convey nostalgia for a lost brotherhood with shared values of community, identity, loyalty and camaraderie whose members could count on each other and freely and proudly express their aggressive masculinity and domination. This representation of gangs expresses a longing for an idealized past when social structures and gender roles appeared simpler and more well-defined. The representation of a male-dominated gangster environment often creates a distance with the audience, and nostalgia because the plots are often set in the past: “Postclassical gangster films can encourage such nostalgic views of masculinity, especially in the fact that many narratives are confined to the past.”<fnref n="190" /> The nostalgia is also triggered by the characters and the audience's longing for the lost masculine ideals they represent: “It is as if popular culture reacts to the ever-increasing complexities of modern identity by promoting nostalgia for a lost simplicity.”<fnref n="191" /> Viewers can escape from their reality and fulfill

<footnote n="188">¹⁸⁸ David E. Ruth, *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918-1934*, Chicago, University of Chicago press, 1996, 128.</footnote>

<footnote n="189">¹⁸⁹ Ron Wilson, *The Gangster Film: Fatal Success in American Cinema*, New-York: Wallflower, 2015, 39.</footnote>

<footnote n="190">¹⁹⁰ George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 213.</footnote>

<footnote n="191">¹⁹¹ *Ibid*,</footnote>
their fantasies of aggressive masculinity through the films and series. As Larke-Walsh states: “aggressive masculinity can be viewed nostalgically, as it operates within seemingly stable binary oppositions of good and evil, male and female, where gender behavior and roles are unproblematic.”<fnref n="192" /> Therefore this yearning for a past expression of masculinity serves “to escape from a collective guilt and responsibility for today’s political confrontations”<fnref n="193" />, that can refer to discourses on feminism and gender roles. Gangster movies and series serve as vessels to express a feeling of nostalgia for a lost and fantasized expression of masculinity.

The portrayal of the character of the gangster evolved from the 1930s and the 2000s-2010s. His ethnicity is represented in a less stereotypical way and is no longer used to differentiate him. The character of the gangster is still a violent character but it is not linked to his ethnicity. In the films from the 1930s, the characters resort to aggressive masculinity as a tool for individual success contrary to the characters in the movies and series from the 2000-2010s whose aggressive masculinity is shown as more collective. Finally, different aspects of the gangster’s representation can trigger a feeling of nostalgia such as his ethnicity which is the same in both sets of films and series Recent productions are also nostalgic for former gender roles and expression of masculinity which was already expressed in 1930s films.

<footnote n="192">¹⁹² George S. Larke-Walsh, *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010, 213.</footnote>

<footnote n="193">¹⁹³ Matthew, Leggatt, *What is Yesterday?: Nostalgia in Contemporary Film and Television*, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2021, 23.</footnote>
## Conclusion

Overall, the representation of Prohibition in gangster films and series of the 2000s-2010s is distinctly different from the gangster films of the early 1930s. This evolution seems to have occurred gradually and logically and was caused by the perspective and technical improvements acquired over time. Still, recent productions continue to respect the codes of the genre established by 1930s films in many ways.

First, recent productions are more inclined to explain the historical context of Prohibition but their contextualization remains incomplete. Among the movies and series in the corpus, *Little Caesar* and *Road to Perdition* do not even mention Prohibition, *The Public Enemy* and *Scarface* only set the films during Prohibition and *Lawless* gives a brief definition of Prohibition and repeal. Finally, *Boardwalk Empire* is the only one that mentions the history of alcohol prohibition in the United States and the establishment of the 18th Amendment, by showing temperance movements and giving some of the reasons that led to the Amendment, as well as referring to the failed attempts and then successful attempt at repeal. Regardless of the time when the movies were shot, they concentrate on the years when Prohibition occurs, not the years before primarily because they are not long enough to do so. Even though *Boardwalk Empire* focuses on the same period, it finds the time to recall these events, although briefly, in the span of its five seasons.

Moreover, since the movies focus on the gangsters, they only represent a few characters in favor of Prohibition. Modern gangster films and series have a larger range of characters in favor, contrary to 1930s movies. Once again, *Boardwalk Empire* portrays the most characters in favor of Prohibition and they are different from one another and multi-dimensional. The show includes characters who are fervent believers in the Amendment, like the members of the Women's Temperance Union, characters who believe in law enforcement in general and not particularly in the 18th Amendment, like Esther Randolph and characters who start as supporters and end up as objectors, like Margaret. Moreover, *Boardwalk Empire*, as well as *Lawless* show similar types of characters with Prohibition Agents dedicated to their job, like Van Alden and Rakes and corrupted law enforcers breaking the 18th Amendment, like agent Sebso in *Boardwalk Empire* and the sheriff in *Lawless*. Those characters mirror the police agents from 1930s gangster films who were always portrayed as firm believers in respecting the laws, although they are not explicitly favorable to the 18th Amendment. A few other characters share the same beliefs and act as the gangsters' antagonists, like Tony's mother in *Scarface* and Tom's brother in *The Public Enemy*.

Then, gangster films of the 1930s focus on Prohibition in the city, whereas one of the modern films of the corpus, *Lawless*, portrays Prohibition in the countryside. This setting offers a different
depiction of Prohibition even though it remains close to the portrayal of disobedience to the 18th
Amendment shown in cities, spreading the unfounded legend that Prohibition was unwanted and
flouted in the whole country.

Secondly, movies from the early 1930s and 2000s-2010s often focus on the same aspects of Prohibition which are more or less developed depending on the release date of the movie.

Movies and series from the 2000s-2010s are more explicit and detailed in their representation of organized crime during Prohibition. They directly show how the gangsters start a successful business thanks to the traffic of alcohol. *Lawless* and *Boardwalk Empire* depict all the different stages of the traffic, from the manufacture and importation to the sale by way of transportation. However, *Road to Perdition* does not share the transparency on the subject with the other two modern productions of the corpus. The film maintains the mystery around the gangsters' activity, as a reference to the 1930s gangster films, which initiated this particularity under the pressure of censorship. The evolution of the representation of Prohibition in gangster films can also be seen through the portrayal of characters drinking on screen. In modern gangster films and series, there are more characters shown drinking and they come from different backgrounds. They are law enforcers, like the sheriff and his deputy in *Lawless* and the sheriff of Atlantic City, Eli Thomspon, and Attorney General Daugherty in *Boardwalk Empire*. They are gangsters, like the Bondurant brothers in *Lawless*, Nucky Thompson in *Boardwalk Empire* and Michael Sullivan in *Road to Perdition*. They also are women connected to gangsters, or who are gangsters themselves, like Maggie in *Lawless* and Margaret and Sally Wheet in *Boardwalk Empire*. Meanwhile, gangster films from the 1930s suggest that the characters drinking are only the gangsters and their girlfriends, like Tom Powers and Gwen Allen in *The Public Enemy*, which associates drinking with villains. The intensive drinking shown in movies from both periods, especially in the 2000s-2010s adds to the legend that Prohibition didn't successfully reduce liquor consumption.

Furthermore, most movies and series from both periods are set in urban areas, since it is where most gangsters operate and they represent the city differently. *Boardwalk Empire* is set in Atlantic City and *Road to Perdition* is set in Chicago and both represent the city as crowded, busy, spectacular and violent. The three movies from the 1930s are also set in Chicago and neglect other cities that fostered criminal activities during Prohibition. Moreover, *Scarface* and *Little Caesar* barely show the city, for budgetary reasons. However, *The Public Enemy* contains a few outdoor shots that are reproduced and upgraded in *Road to Perdition*.

Thirdly, gangster movies from the 2000s-2010s and 1930s both express a form of criticism and nostalgia that changed over time. The recent gangster films, enlightened by the knowledge of the failure of Prohibition, criticize the 18th Amendment. The movies lay stress on the impossibility of enforcing the Amendment, through the depiction of overwhelming corruption and its
infringement of individual rights by making gangsters seem sympathetic, like in *Lawless*. On the contrary, movies from the 1930s never criticize the Amendment, partly because of censorship, but criticize gangsters and their illegal activity by portraying them as unsympathetic and bloodthirsty.

Movies and series from both periods are nostalgic, but the forms of nostalgia they trigger are different because of the years separating the period of Prohibition from the movies' release dates. Modern films are nostalgic because they portray a romanticized past period and imitate a preexisting genre. Movies from the 1930s also trigger a nostalgic feeling among modern audiences because they are regarded as the movies that set the basis of the gangster genre. However, they were already nostalgic for their contemporary audience who regretted the early days of Prohibition, before the Depression. Furthermore, the movies use different techniques to trigger nostalgia depending on whether they were released in the 1930s or the 2000s-2010s. Recent films use songs from the period they depict, incorporate archive images and resort to black and white, like in *Boardwalk Empire* and long fixed shots like in *Road to Perdition*. Moreover, in order to stay relevant to modern audiences, they often mix these techniques with modern camerawork and anachronistic music, like in *Lawless*. Making a nostalgic product still appealing to modern audiences prevents modern movies and series from being faithful to the time they represent. In the same manner, 1930s films were limited in their representation of Prohibition by censorship and by the nostalgia for the early 1920s which encouraged a glamorized representation of the period.

The representation of gangsters in gangster films and series from the 2000s-2010s evolved and changed in several ways compared to gangster films from the early 1930s.

First, the ethnic identities of the gangsters, who often come from Italian and Irish backgrounds in movies and series from the corpus, are portrayed differently in recent productions compared to older ones. To demonstrate this evolution, I confronted the movies in four aspects: accent, gestures, skin color and costumes. These four factors were particularly used as ethnic markers in gangster films from the early 1930s. Gangster films from the 1930s were released in a context of hostility toward people with ethnic backgrounds after massive waves of immigration. Americans were trying to control them and redefine American ideals. Therefore, when these movies were released the accents and dialogue of the gangsters unsettled moral guardians and provoked the reinforcement of the Production Code to control the figure of the gangster. Furthermore, the Code also forbade the depiction of gangsters in a sympathetic light. Consequently, the ethnic vernacular accents are only spoken by the character of the gangster, conveying a negative depiction of ethnicity by linking it to criminality. Their accent is used to set them apart as different. Similarly, gangsters' gestures in the films from the 1930s were used to differentiate them and were linked to their ethnicity. Stereotypes around ethnicity emerged from theories that linked certain ethnicities to different crimes and behaviors.
The gangster films and series of the 2000s-2010s, were released long after the loosening of censorship, which allowed them to depict ethnicities in a more realistic and positive light. This also allowed filmmakers to portray the character of the gangster in a more sympathetic light. These productions were also released when people from the same ethnicities as the ones depicted in gangster films of the 1930s were long assimilated and integrated into American society, and there was no longer hostility toward them. This is transparent in recent gangster films and series, which often depict assimilated gangsters, after their rise into organized crime. For instance, Nucky and Michael not only do not speak with a specific accent but also do not move in a particularly animalistic way. In addition, gangsters in recent productions have very few ethnic markers. Gradually movies freed themselves from negative stereotypes concerning ethnicity. There are a few exceptions, like Rosetti in *Boardwalk Empire*, who recalls the stereotypical Italian gangster who is short-tempered and animalistic, and Howard in *Lawless*, who is also animalistic and impulsive although he is not an ethnic gangster but a white hillbilly, also seen as “other”.

Concerning costumes, in the gangster films of the 1930s, the character of the gangster goes through a transformative experience. He changes his clothes for expensive and luxurious ones, which marks his rise and success in organized crime. However, his outfits serve to differentiate and ridicule him because they are too showy. The costumes are also linked to criminality because the gangsters are the only ones wearing them. Over time, these types of costumes became uniforms for gangsters and also a genre signifier. In recent productions, the character of the gangster is well-dressed from the beginning, because as I mentioned earlier, he is represented as already successful. Costumes are not used to separate him and mock him, on the contrary, he is respected. Costumes are still linked to criminality as the audience can recognize the characters’ line of work just by the way they dress.

Secondly, the violence engendered by gangsters is a central theme in both gangster films and series from the 1930s and the 2000s-2010s but it is depicted differently. In the gangster films from the early 1930s, the gangster's violent traits were explicitly associated with ethnic stereotypes because gangsters were the only characters performing acts of violence. This contributed to depicting ethnicity negatively by setting gangsters as dangerous and different and showing them as unsympathetic characters. Moreover, violence was depicted implicitly. For instance, *Scarface* and *The Public Enemy* prefer to show the reactions of the characters witnessing a murder rather than the person being killed. Sometimes characters are still shot on screen but it is only implied by the gunfire, the movies do not show blood or wounds. Recent productions do not explicitly link gangsters' violence to ethnicity because there is a larger range of characters that are shown as violent, including police forces. This contributes to erasing pejorative ethnic stereotypes and also depicting gangsters in a more sympathetic light to some extent because other characters are equally or more violent than them. In addition, films and series from the 2000s-2010s depict violence more
graphically and explicitly. Many characters are directly shown killed or tortured and the productions
abundantly resort to depicting blood and wounds, especially *Boardwalk Empire* and *Lawless*.

Both gangster films from the 1930s and 2000s-2010s display a male-dominated
environment. In the gangster movies of the 1930s, gangsters used aggressive masculinity as a tool
for individual success. This translates into a desire to be in control of everything and to eliminate
competition, achieved through assertive language, overt physicality and ruthlessness. Still,
gangsters' masculinity was challenged through their consumer status considered effeminate and
their sexuality. Recent productions depict a slightly different masculinity, the gangsters still resort to
the use of aggressiveness to succeed, but are also depicted as more complex, vulnerable and
troubled by moral struggles. The movies focus more on collective masculinity, yet, aggressiveness
is still portrayed as a necessary tool to survive. However, it is put to the use of the group rather than
the individual. *Boardwalk Empire*, *Road to Perdition* and *Lawless* depict the functioning of gangs
which are based on respect for hierarchy, loyalty and brotherhood. The gangs are depicted as less
prompt to eliminate their competition through murder and more open to negotiation, as long as it
benefits them, than gangsters in 1930s films. Finally, victims of gangster violence in gangster films
from the 1930s are often women. This seemed to be an attempt to defend traditional gender values
and morality, as women represented in the movies are flappers. Today, women are still represented
as victims of the violence of gangsters, but there are also more female characters, which allows for
a more nuanced representation of women by giving them more independence for instance. In recent
productions, children are also portrayed as victims of gangsters' violent behavior because narratives
focus on other aspects of gangsters' lives like fatherhood. Therefore, children are shown in
vulnerable positions in this violent environment. Furthermore, the gangsters themselves are victims
of violence, in the gangster films of the beginning of the 20th century the gangster is killed at the
end, which was also a way of criticizing his way of life. Today, as the productions display a more
collective environment, they show the gangster as vulnerable when he is alone. The only exception
is *Lawless*, the main characters do not suffer the same tragic end and return to a normal life.

Thirdly, gangster movies and series from the 1930s and 2000s-2010s both express a form of nostalgia for the character of the gangster. These pictures draw their inspiration from historical figures. Movies from the 1930s triggered a nostalgia for the recent past by depicting the early years of the careers of gangsters such as Al Capone whereas recent productions are nostalgic because they represent the same gangsters or gangsters from the same era.

Ethnicity is used as a tool for nostalgia, as in recent productions the same ethnicities are portrayed
on screen as in the movies of the 1930s. The nostalgia can be expressed through dialogue as recent
productions refer to words and expressions used in previous movies. Ethnicity is used as a
distancing device, as the plots are set in the past, which also encourages the viewer to be more
inclined to feel sympathy for the main characters. Moreover, the costumes of the gangster which are
linked to his ethnicity also serve as a trigger for nostalgia today. A nostalgia for a time and place is
conveyed by the reproductions of costumes and scenes in which costumes are central, like fitting
scenes. Finally, the representation of violence in recent gangster films and series can resonate with
the representation of violence in gangster films of the 1930s and therefore be nostalgic. *Lawless*,
*Road to Perdition* and *Boardwalk Empire* occasionally refer to the portrayal of violence in earlier
movies by respecting the same aesthetic codes established by these films. In addition, films from the
1930s and recent productions are nostalgic in their representation of aggressive masculinity. Films
from the 1930s were already nostalgic for a past expression of masculinity challenged by
unemployment during the Depression. Recent productions are nostalgic in their representation of
collective masculinity and the feeling of belonging to a group. They promote nostalgia for a lost
simplicity by depicting an idealized past and former gender roles.

The evolution of the representation of the character of the gangster can be further analyzed
as many gangster films were released between the 2010s and today. The representation of aging
gangsters such as in *The Irishman* released in 2019 or *Capone* released in 2020, which depict the
last moments of Al Capone, can raise the question of whether gangsters are idolized until the end of
their lives or not. Showing this part of their lives can put into perspective their actions and morality.
Portraying aging gangsters may offer a more nuanced depiction of the lives they led by showing the
consequences of their activities and questioning their status of glamorized gangsters and their
display of aggressive masculinity. Choosing to show gangsters at the last stage of their lives can
lead to depicting their masculinity differently and highlighting the limits to the power the gangster
way of life can offer.
## Bibliography

### Primary sources:

### Films

*Boardwalk Empire*, Winter, Terrence. Marc Wahlberg. 2010-2014.

*Lawless*, Hillcoat, John. Annapurna Pictures, Benaroya Pictures, Blum Hanson Allen Films, Pie Films, Red Wagon Productions. 2012.

*Little Caesar*, LeRoy, Mervyn. First National Pictures. 1931.

*Road to Perdition*, Mendes, Sam. The Zanuck Company, DreamWorks, 20th Century Fox. 2002.

*Scarface*, Hawks, Howard. The Caddo Company. 1932.

*The Public Enemy*, Wellman, William. Darryl F Zanuck. 1932.

### Secondary sources:

### Documentary

Burns Ken, Novick Lynn. *Prohibition: une expérience américaine 1920-1933*, Arte Editions, 2012.

### Books

Clark, Norman H. *Deliver Us From Evil: an Interpretation of American Prohibition*, New York: W.W. Norton & company, 1976.

Coffey, Thomas. *The Long Thirst: Prohibition in America: 1920-1933*, New York: Norton, 1975.

Durden Smith, Jo. *Mafia: l'histoire complète du crime organisé*, Champs-sur-Marne: Music & entertainment Books, 2009.
Foucrier, Annick. *Les gangsters et la société américaine (1920-1960)*, Paris: Ellipses Editions, 2001.

Greene, Richard. *Boardwalk Empire and Philosophy: Bootleg This Book*, Chicago (III.): Open Court, 2013.

Larke-Walsh, George S. *Screening the Mafia: Masculinity, Ethnicity and Mobsters from the Godfather to the Sopranos*, Jefferson, N. C.: McFarland & Co Inc, 2010.

Leggatt, Matthew. *What is Yesterday?: Nostalgia in Contemporary Film and Television*, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2021.

Munby, Johnathan. *Public Enemies, Public Heroes: Screening The Gangster From Little Caesar to Touch of Evil*, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. 1999.

Rorabaugh, William J. *Prohibition: a Concise History*, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.

Ruth David, E. *Inventing the Public Enemy: The Gangster in American Culture, 1918–1934*, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1996.

Wilson, Ron. *The Gangster Film: Fatal Success in American Cinema*, New York: Wallflower, 2015.

## Interviews

DP/30: The Oral History Of Hollywood. (2012, 30 août). DP/30: Lawless, director John Hillcoat [Vidéo]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71z9F-C0wds. 02/09/2024.

## Websites

About Us... The Moonshine Legacy Continues. (s.d.). Bondurant Brothers Distillery. https://www.bondurantbrothersdistillery.com/about-us.html, last accessed on 05/09/2023.
Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Public-Enemy 02/12/2024

Chicago History Museum, https://images.chicagohistory.org/search/?searchQuery=Al+Capone+, 02/09/2024

Library of Congress website, https://www.loc.gov/, 02/12/2024

Newspapers.com, https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-cincinnati-enquirer-death-valley-far/18595626/, 02/12/2024

The Golden Globes website, https://www.goldenglobes.com/, 02/12/2024.

The Mob Museum, https://themobmuseum.org/, 02/12/2024

The Press of Atlantic City, https://pressofatlanticcity.com/, 02/12/2024

Website of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, https://www.oscars.org/, 02/12/2024.

Website of the Festival de Cannes, https://www.festival-cannes.com/, 02/12/2024.

West Virginia University, https://www.wvu.edu/, 02/12/2024
Table of Figures

<table><tr><td>Figure 1: The Women's Temperance Union holding a sign in Boardwalk Empire, season 1, episode 5, Taylor, Alan, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2010</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 2: Women's Christian Temperance Union Marching on Spruce Street, Morgantown, W.Va, undated/West Virginia University</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 3: Rakes hitting Jack in Lawless, Hillcoat, John. Lawless. 2012</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 4: Jack shooting Rakes in Lawless, Hillcoat, John. Lawless. 2012</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 5: Tom stealing alcohol in The Public Enemy, Wellman, William. The Public Enemy. 193...</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 6: Michael Jr. looking into the warehouse through a hole in Road to Perdition, Mendes, Sam. Road to Perdition. 2002</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 7: liquor hidden in orange boxes in Boardwalk Empire, season 4, episode 8, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2014</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 8: The Bondurants' distillery hidden in the woods in Lawless, Hillcoat, John. Lawless. 2012</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 9: Barrels of alcohol produced in this barn in Lawless, Hillcoat, John. Lawless. 2012</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 10: Death Valley Farm in The Cincinnati Enquirer, page 31, Monday, January 21, 1952./ Newspapers.com</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 11: Lucy and Nucky in Boardwalk Empire, season 1, episode 2, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2010</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 12: James Cagney and Jean Harlow in The Public Enemy (1931)/ Britannica</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 13: Chicago in The Public Enemy, Wellman, William. The Public Enemy. 1931</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 14: a crowd in the streets of Chicago in The Public Enemy, Wellman, William. The Public Enemy. 1931</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 15: Chicago in Road to Perdition, Mendes, Sam. Road to Perdition. 2002</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 16: a crowd in the streets of Chicago in Road to Perdition, Mendes, Sam. Road to Perdition. 2002</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 17: The Atlantic City sign in Boardwalk Empire, season 1, episode 9, Anderson, Brad, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2010</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 18: street performers entertaining passersby on the boardwalk in Boardwalk Empire, season 1, episode 9, Anderson, Brad, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2010</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 19: The boardwalk in Boardwalk Empire, season 2, episode 6, Podeswa, Jeremy, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2011</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 20: A couple with a stroller filled with alcohol in Boardwalk Empire, season 1, episode 1, Scorsese, Martin, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2010</td><td>44</td></tr></table>
<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 21: A couple with a stroller filled with alcohol in <i>The Public Enemy</i>, Wellman, William. <i>The Public Enemy</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>44</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 22: Rico and Joe eating spaghetti and coffee in <i>Little Caesar</i>, LeRoy, Mervyn. <i>Little Caesar</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>44</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 23: Rosetti and Tonino enjoying their coffee and spaghetti in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 3, episode 2, Sakharov, Alik, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2012</td>
      <td>44</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 24: shooting in the rain in <i>Road to Perdition</i>, Mendes, Sam. <i>Road to Perdition</i>. 2002</td>
      <td>45</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 25: Tom in the rain before the shooting in <i>The Public Enemy</i>, Wellman, William. <i>The Public Enemy</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>45</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 26: M. Sullivan's Buick in <i>Road to Perdition</i>, Mendes, Sam. <i>Road to Perdition</i>. 2002</td>
      <td>45</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 27: Nucky Thompson's Rolls in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 1, episode 7, Coulter, Allen, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2010</td>
      <td>45</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 28: the Attorney's speech on the radio in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 5, episode 7, Coulter, Allen, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2014</td>
      <td>49</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 29: Lucky Luciano from black and white to color in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 5, episode 7, Coulter, Allen, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2014</td>
      <td>49</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 30: Meyer Lansky in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 5, episode 7, Coulter, Allen, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2014</td>
      <td>50</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 31: archive images and the series' footage in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 5, episode 7, Coulter, Allen, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2014</td>
      <td>50</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 32: Michael and his son talking in the car in <i>Road to Perdition</i>, Mendes, Sam. <i>Road to Perdition</i>. 2002</td>
      <td>51</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 33: Tony and a gang member in the back of their car in <i>Scarface</i>, Hawks, Howard. <i>Scarface</i>. 1932</td>
      <td>51</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 34: Rico and Joe in their car in <i>Little Caesar</i>, LeRoy, Mervyn. <i>Little Caesar</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>51</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 35: Tom Powers's shoulder shrugs in <i>The Public Enemy</i>, Wellman, William. <i>The Public Enemy</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>59</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 36: Rico's rictus and snarling in <i>Little Caesar</i>, LeRoy, Mervyn. <i>Little Caesar</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>60</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 37: Tony's threatening stare in <i>Scarface</i>, Hawks, Howard. <i>Scarface</i>. 1932</td>
      <td>60</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 38: Howard's violent outburst in <i>Lawless</i>, Hillcoat, John. <i>Lawless</i>. 2012</td>
      <td>60</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 39: Rosetti imitating a monkey in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 3, episode 3, Podeswa, Jeremy, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2012</td>
      <td>61</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 40: Rosetti and Chalky in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 3, episode 11, Coulter, Allen, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2012</td>
      <td>62</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 41: Al Capone, 1930/Chicago History Museum</td>
      <td>65</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 42: Attorney William F. Waugh of the American Legion talking with gangster Al Capone, Chicago, Illinois, March 1929./Chicago History Museum.</td>
      <td>65</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 43: Rico Bandello's outfits in Little Caesar, LeRoy Mervyn. Little Caesar. 1931.</td>
      <td>66</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 44: Tony Camonte's outfits in Scarface, Hawks, Howard. Scarface. 193.</td>
      <td>66</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 45: Tom Powers's outfits in The Public Enemy, Wellman, William. The Public Enemy. 1931.</td>
      <td>66</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 46: close up of Rico's ring in Little Caesar, LeRoy, Mervyn. Little Caesar. 1931.</td>
      <td>67</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 47: A police officer's outfit in Scarface, Hawks, Howard. Scarface. 1932.</td>
      <td>68</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 48: A police officer's outfit in Little Caesar, LeRoy, Mervyn. Little Caesar. 1931.</td>
      <td>68</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 49: Michael Sullivan's outfit in Road to Perdition, Mendes, Sam. Road to Perdition. 2002.</td>
      <td>68</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 50: Sullivan's outfit at the end of Road to Perdition, Mendes, Sam. Road to Perdition. 2002.</td>
      <td>69</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 51: Bandello's outfit at the end of Little Caesar, LeRoy Mervyn. Little Caesar. 1931.</td>
      <td>69</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 52: Nucky's outfit at the beginning of Boardwalk Empire, season 1, episode 1, Scorsese, Martin, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2010.</td>
      <td>70</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 53: Gaston Means' outfit in Boardwalk Empire, season 3, episode 8, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2012.</td>
      <td>70</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 54: Nucky's outfit after the third season of Boardwalk Empire, season 5, episode 8, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2014.</td>
      <td>70</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 55: Al Capone's outfit before his rise in Boardwalk Empire, season 1, episode 10, Cellan Jones, Simon, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2010.</td>
      <td>71</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 56: Al Capone's outfit in Boardwalk Empire, season 3, episode 4, Skogland, Kari, Winter, Terrence, HBO, Boardwalk Empire. 2013.</td>
      <td>71</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 57: Howard and Forest's outfits in Lawless, Hillcoat, John. Lawless. 2012.</td>
      <td>71</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 58: Jack's outfit in Lawless, Hillcoat, John. Lawless. 2012.</td>
      <td>71</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 59: Rico (in the car) shooting at Tony in Little Caesar, LeRoy, Mervyn. Little Caesar. 1931.</td>
      <td>74</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 60: reaction shot of Cesca in Scarface, Hawks, Howard. Scarface. 1932.</td>
      <td>74</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 61: reaction shot of Matt in The Public Enemy, Wellman, William. The Public Enemy. 1931.</td>
      <td>75</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 62: Forrest punching a man in the throat in Lawless, Hillcoat, John. Lawless. 2012.</td>
      <td>76</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 63: Michael killing Connor who is off screen in Road to Perdition, Mendes, Sam. Road to Perdition. 2002.</td>
      <td>77</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
<table>
  <tbody>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 64: Connor's body revealed by the mirror on the door in <i>Road to Perdition</i>, Mendes, Sam. <i>Road to Perdition</i>. 2002</td>
      <td>78</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 65: Rico sitting with his feet on the desk in <i>Little Caesar</i>, LeRoy, Mervyn. <i>Little Caesar</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>80</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 66: Rooney's men escorting a man out by force in <i>Road to Perdition</i>, Mendes, Sam. <i>Road to Perdition</i>. 2002</td>
      <td>82</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 67: Michael getting shot in <i>Road to Perdition</i>, Mendes, Sam. <i>Road to Perdition</i>. 2002</td>
      <td>88</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 68: close up of Nucky's face after getting shot in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 5, episode 8, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2014</td>
      <td>88</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 69: two "mug shots" of Al Capone, half-length portraits, one facing front, the other facing right, 1931/ Library of Congress</td>
      <td>90</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 70: Rico Bandello in <i>Little Caesar</i>, LeRoy, Mervyn. <i>Little Caesar</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>90</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 71: Tony Camonte in <i>Scarface</i>, Hawks, Howard. <i>Scarface</i>. 1932</td>
      <td>90</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 72: Dion O'Bannion/ The Mob Museum</td>
      <td>92</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 73: Tom Powers in <i>The Public Enemy</i>, Wellman, William. <i>The Public Enemy</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>92</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 74: two shots of Al Capone, one facing front, the other facing left, in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 3, episode 1, Van Patten, Tim and season 2, episode 8, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2012/2013</td>
      <td>93</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 75: Capone watching his documentary in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 5, episode 4, Paltrow, Jake, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2014</td>
      <td>94</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 76: Enoch Jonhson/ The Press of Atlantic City</td>
      <td>97</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 77: Enoch Thompson in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 1, episode 1, Scorsese, Martin, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2010</td>
      <td>97</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 78: Rico's dark suit with stripes in <i>Little Caesar</i>, LeRoy, Mervyn. <i>Little Caesar</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>100</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 79: Tom's dark suit with stripes in <i>The Public Enemy</i>, Wellman, William. <i>The Public Enemy</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>100</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 80: Floyd's dark suit with stripes in <i>Lawless</i>, Hillcoat, John. <i>Lawless</i>. 2012</td>
      <td>100</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 81: Nucky's dark suit with stripes in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 3, episode 1, Van Patten, Tim, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2011</td>
      <td>100</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 82: Rico's costume fitting in <i>Little Caesar</i>, LeRoy, Mervyn. <i>Little Caesar</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>101</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 83: Tom's costume fitting in <i>The Public Enemy</i>, Wellman, William. <i>The Public Enemy</i>. 1931</td>
      <td>101</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 84: Al's costume fitting in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 1, episode 4, Podeswa, Jeremy, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2010</td>
      <td>101</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
      <td>Figure 85: The shooting scene in <i>Road to Perdition</i>, Mendes, Sam. <i>Road to Perdition</i>. 2002</td>
      <td>103</td>
    </tr>
  </tbody>
</table>
<table><tr><td>Figure 86: Jack picking up bullets on the floor in <i>Lawless</i>, Hillcoat, John. <i>Lawless</i>. 2012</td><td>104</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 87: Floyd shooting a car in <i>Lawless</i>, Hillcoat, John. <i>Lawless</i>. 2012</td><td>104</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 88: a car driving by and gunning down the front window aiming at Nucky in <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>, season 5, episode 5, Bianchi, Ed, Winter, Terrence, HBO, <i>Boardwalk Empire</i>. 2014</td><td>105</td></tr><tr><td>Figure 89: cars driving by and gunning down the front window aiming at Tony in <i>Scarface</i>, Hawks, Howard. <i>Scarface</i>. 1931</td><td>105</td></tr></table>