Illegal
I would really like to know what led studio executives to consider a remake of the 1932 crime drama THE MOUTHPIECE not once, but twice. This 1955 release was the third film version of the original, which was a play by Frank J. Collins. In it, Vincent Mallon, a corrupt lawyer, turns on an old flame of his to prevent the unjustly accused fiancé of Celia Farraday from prison. The 1932 film changed the surname ‘Mallon’ to ‘Day’.
ILLEGAL follows the 1932 film in its broad theme, of a district attorney who sends the wrong men to be executed, and then turns coat and goes to work for the criminal classes. The difference is the love interest is completely altered. Where Celia is a young woman who attracts the roving eye of lawyer Vincent, ILLEGAL’s Ellen Miles (Nina Foch) by contrast has eyes for our lawyer, her boss, Victor Scott (Edward G. Robinson).
Scott is a very different character to the Vincent Day of the earlier film. If I may borrow from the long-running television series ‘Suits’, where Day seemed a Harvey Specter, there is more of the Louis Litt about Scott. Both are of the ‘winning is everything’ school. Scott was mentored by Miles’ father, and in turn has brought her up through the law and into the district attorney’s office. Thus, there is a case to be made that Miles’ affection for Scott is unnatural, the daughter turning to the father figure. Meanwhile, Scott is urging her to turn to their colleague, investigator Ray Borden (Hugh Marlowe), who will surely be a good provider, and be more appropriate for a woman of her age. Mallon/Day was just a lecherous boss with an eye for a pretty woman.
Everything in ILLEGAL is more convoluted than in the earlier film. The business that brings ILLEGAL to its crisis is far more elaborate than the play’s and 1932 film’s simple theft of some money. I’m not altogether sure we gain a lot more from the additions. 1950s Hollywood became fascinated by psychological explorations of its characters, and ILLEGAL is part of this trend.
Beyond that, I found Foch looked too old for her part. Aged 31 in 1955, I would have added a couple of years to that. I do wonder if using an actor who looks old for her age served to minimise the potential scandal of a woman in her mid-twenties yearning for the mature charms of sixty-years-old Robinson.
Robinson is by far the best thing in the film. Everything about the film looks cheap (except the paintings that Robinson apparently lent for use on the sets), but his performance is golden. Robinson had got into difficulties during the Red Scare for being too close to communist organisations, although he himself was never a communist. (Miles’ predicament owes something to a similar situation of being unjustly accused of nefarious activities.) This film gives some evidence of the fine performances we lost thanks to this silly obsession that still grips Americans in a world where there is little organised Left to threaten Capitalism.
© 2026 Paul Brewer
ILLEGAL follows the 1932 film in its broad theme, of a district attorney who sends the wrong men to be executed, and then turns coat and goes to work for the criminal classes. The difference is the love interest is completely altered. Where Celia is a young woman who attracts the roving eye of lawyer Vincent, ILLEGAL’s Ellen Miles (Nina Foch) by contrast has eyes for our lawyer, her boss, Victor Scott (Edward G. Robinson).
Scott is a very different character to the Vincent Day of the earlier film. If I may borrow from the long-running television series ‘Suits’, where Day seemed a Harvey Specter, there is more of the Louis Litt about Scott. Both are of the ‘winning is everything’ school. Scott was mentored by Miles’ father, and in turn has brought her up through the law and into the district attorney’s office. Thus, there is a case to be made that Miles’ affection for Scott is unnatural, the daughter turning to the father figure. Meanwhile, Scott is urging her to turn to their colleague, investigator Ray Borden (Hugh Marlowe), who will surely be a good provider, and be more appropriate for a woman of her age. Mallon/Day was just a lecherous boss with an eye for a pretty woman.
Everything in ILLEGAL is more convoluted than in the earlier film. The business that brings ILLEGAL to its crisis is far more elaborate than the play’s and 1932 film’s simple theft of some money. I’m not altogether sure we gain a lot more from the additions. 1950s Hollywood became fascinated by psychological explorations of its characters, and ILLEGAL is part of this trend.
Beyond that, I found Foch looked too old for her part. Aged 31 in 1955, I would have added a couple of years to that. I do wonder if using an actor who looks old for her age served to minimise the potential scandal of a woman in her mid-twenties yearning for the mature charms of sixty-years-old Robinson.
Robinson is by far the best thing in the film. Everything about the film looks cheap (except the paintings that Robinson apparently lent for use on the sets), but his performance is golden. Robinson had got into difficulties during the Red Scare for being too close to communist organisations, although he himself was never a communist. (Miles’ predicament owes something to a similar situation of being unjustly accused of nefarious activities.) This film gives some evidence of the fine performances we lost thanks to this silly obsession that still grips Americans in a world where there is little organised Left to threaten Capitalism.
© 2026 Paul Brewer
Mini Review: Edward G. Robinson dominates a film that adds too much 1950s Hollywood psychology to a 1929 play that worked fine as it was.