Like so many films made during Hollywood's classic era, this one was re-made just a few years later as "Castle on the Hudson" (with John Garfield). Both are quite good but I prefer this original film...slightly.The film begins with Tommy Connors (Spencer Tracy) arriving at Sing Sing. He's cocky and assumes that with his connections he'll get all sorts of special privileges. The warden (Arthur Byron) puts Tommy in his place...and informs him that if he doesn't want to work or wear a prison uniform, he didn't have to...even if that meant going outside in the winter in rags! Eventually, Tommy gets with the program and develops a grudging respect for the warden...and vice-versa. So how does this new-found respect end up backfiring for both of them? Watch the picture.The acting in this one is simply wonderful. Tracy, as usual, is great but so is the supporting cast. The script also is quite nice...and make for an enjoyable viewing experience.

One of the biggest draws of this movie is that it features a couple of legends, Spencer Tracy and Bette Davis, a little bit before they hit it big. Tracy plays a big-time criminal who is imprisoned, and Davis is his girlfriend waiting for him on the outside. Both turn in good performances, with Tracy in particular playing the scenes in which he's called upon to be aggressive well. Partially filmed on location in Sing Sing, director Michael Curtiz does a good job of making use of the setting and varying his camera angles. I loved how he superimposed the number of years the convicts had served while they were walking around at the beginning and end of the film. As for the story, I have to say, it goes beyond plausibility at times relative to how respectfully the inmates are treated. Real life Sing Sing warden Lewis E. Lawes had creative control over the movie, and that may have played a role in that. I liked how there is a sense of honor from both the screen warden (Arthur Byron) and Tracy's character, even though they are on different sides of the law. I also liked the touching simplicity of some of the scenes on death row towards the end. It's not a great film, but it's certainly watchable, and good stuff.

Although I hadn't seen it in many years, this was a film that I remembered. Some of the scenes are simply unforgettable, even including the opening credits where as the convicts walk past their number of years follow them in white letters, leading up to "20,000 YEARS" and then the main title. A number of things made this film stand above the typical gangster flicks of the time. For example, much of the dialog is rather sophisticated for a prison yarn. A few select scenes seemed to be filmed on location along the Hudson River.I always saw Spencer Tracy's breakout film as being "Fury", made 4 years later, but after seeing this again, I would have to say this was a dramatic breakthrough for him. And, here he wasn't as guilty of talking loudly to look tough or "in charge" (as he often did in "Riffraff", for example).Time does take its toll, however. There was clearly part of a scene missing from the print supplied to TCM, roughly at the 26 minute point. when the Tracy character is being tested so as to determine what his job should be.I couldn't find anything online to support the idea that Sing Sing allowed a few prisoners out on the honor system, although I did find an article dating to the 1920s that supported the concept in general, although it did not mention Sing Sing. So, while this part of the plot seemed illogical...well, perhaps. I have to admit that it was handled well in the script. James Cagney had been the original star slated to star in this film, but I can't imagine him pulling this off as well as did Tracy.One thing that particularly interested me was the supporting role by Louis Calhern...the earliest film I have seen him in...and in this case the slick villain lawyer. Two other performances worth mentioning here are that of Bette Davis as Tracy's love interest...really quite beautiful here; and that of the warden, played superbly by Arthur Byron.A fine movie. Thank god it was Spencer Tracy and not Jimmy Cagney.

Warner Bros. began their grim social dramas in the '30s and 20,000 YEARS IN SING SING is a good companion piece to their other blockbuster drama I WAS A FUGITIVE FROM A CHAIN GANG.If this one had been made ten years later, it would have starred Humphrey Bogart (a much more convincing tough guy prisoner than Tracy), and Ann Sheridan would have played the gangster's moll. Here the roles are essayed by SPENCER TRACY and BETTE DAVIS, both of them effective although not as well cast as Bogart and Sheridan would have been.Tracy is the swaggering bully who thinks life owes him something, even in prison, and only after some hardships behind prison walls does he begin to respond to the humanity of a good warden. All of the prison scenes are well done and probably are a true reflection of what life behind bars was like during this time period. LYLE TALBOT has a good supporting role as a rebellious prisoner bent on making a break and LOUIS CALHERN is fine as Joe Finn, a con man who gets his comeuppance from Tracy and Davis in a well staged fight scene.Good, grim social drama has all the usual melodramatic overtones of the '30s dramas but still packs a punch even though it's a time capsule of prison life then. There is virtually no background music throughout unless montages are being shown, something that would change drastically in just a few more years.