What a waste of my time!!!

People are voting emotionally.

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

Warner Brothers made three films of Dashiell Hammett's "The Maltese Falcon" in just over 10 years. The last one that starred Humphrey Bogart in 1941, is the classic film endures with audiences well into the 21st century. This first rendition of 1931 was made just the year after Hammett's novel was printed. That followed its serialization in the leading crime-adventure magazine of the day, "Black Mask."While mildly successful at the box office, this version largely failed to impress the critics and readers of the novel. The reason becomes clear from the start. The plot follows the story fairly closely, but the setting and characters were not true to the story, as Hammett presented them. Sam Spade's apartment is quite luxurious, which in itself is a mystery considering that his detective agency is hard up for money. Most of the scenes are well lit, making it appear more like a stage play that a sultry murder mystery. The characters lack the depth as Hammett saw them. The film seems to focus more on Sam Spade's womanizing than the mystery and crime. Ricardo Cortez goes overboard in his portrayal of Spade with a devil-may-care attitude. He seems hammy as a fun-loving, easygoing cynic. The rest of the cast are little more than passable, with one exception. Dudley Digges is quite good as Casper Gutman. But for Sydney Greenstreet in the 1941 role, Digges's performance would be the one most identified with the role. And, on the opposite end, Bebe Daniels just doesn't deliver a convincing performance for the role of Ruth Wonderly.One thing struck me as strange in this film. In so many scenes, Sam Spade sits down, even while others are standing and talking. It looks awkward on film, and one wonders if he were out of energy and too tired to stand. It looks quite weird. Some of the dialog is taken right out of the book. Some is made up. Here are some favorite lines from this film. Sam Spade, "We didn't believe you. But we believed your $200. You know, darling, for that amount of money, I'd let you tell me a lie every day." Ruth Wonderly, "You don't think I had anything to do with those murders?" Sam Spade, "I forgot to ask you that. Did you?" Ruth Wonderly, "Oh, no. Of course not." Ruth Wonderly, "You won't go to the police, will you?" Sam Spade, "Go to them? Why, all I have to do is sand still and they'll be swarming all over me like a bunch of bees."Sam Spade, "Well, if I'm peddling it, I'm selling to the highest bidder." Ruth Wonderly, "You have a lot of trouble with your women, don't you, Sam?"Ruth Wonderly, "You don't love me. Same Space: Oh, I think I do."

The 1941 version of The Maltese Falcon starring Humphrey Bogart was actually the second remake of The Maltese Falcon. The first remake was Satan Met A Lady, (1936) starring Bette Davis. This film (The Maltese Falcon - 1931) was the original. It doesn't have the pizazz of the Humphrey Bogart version, and it is not a film noir version, but it is extremely faithful to the story, and much more explicit about the various adulterous affairs, out of wedlock sex, and homosexuality. Ricardo Cortez was a big star at the time.Contrary to the many comments in user reviews, it is not a pre-code movie. The Movie Production Code (aka Hays Code) was instituted in 1930, but largely ignored by the studios. It wasn't enforced until 1934 when Joseph Breen took over as head of the Motion Picture Code. The story of the years 1930 - 1933 films which contained much more explicit material than was technically permitted by the code is well told in the TCM documentary "Forbidden Film".Of the three versions of The Maltese Falcon, this is, in my opinion, the second best, with Bogart's version being the best. But this version is a close second, with much to recommend it. It is not more faithful to the novel than the 1941 version, but it is much clearer, especially concerning the sexual sub-plots of the film. It was an A movie in it's time, with top stars including Thelma Todd, Una Merkel, and Dwight Frye. If you like the Bogart version you will probably enjoy this antecedent. Film aficionados and lovers of film history should take special note of this gem.

I first saw this original pre-code 1931 version of The Maltese Falcon titled "Dangerous Female" on the big screen in 1994 & I was shocked & impressed by just how good it was & it gives the classic 1941 version a run for it's money. For it's an interesting historical curiosity. I can see why this version was very successful & well received in 1931 but I can also see why it was soon forgotten.Having read the novel by Dashiell Hammett detective Sam Spade was a ladies man but not to the extent to where Ricardo Cortez took him. Cortez went too far & was a bit excessive & extreme even for a pre-code movie. Spade was also a hard boiled cynical private eye with a code of ethics. Cortez did capture this to a certain point when he wasn't womanizing.Because of it's suggestive, sexual explicitness this version was not re-released when the strict censorship code was enforced in 1934 governing morality & decency. This original version deviates from the book considerably & only touched on the original story & the cast is not that memorable for the most part with the exception of Dwight Frye, we all know him from Dracula & Frankenstein.Ricardo Cortez, Otto Matiesen & Dudley Digges pales in comparison to their 1941 counterparts more stronger screen presence of Humphrey Bogart, Peter Lorre & Sydney Greenstreet in their respective roles as Sam Spade, Joel Cairo & Kasper Gutman the fatman. I will say that it's a toss up with Dwight Frye & Elisha Cook Jr. as Wilmer the gunsel. Both were equally good & right for the part.As for the females, Bebe Daniels, Thelma Todd & Una Merkel are very sexually seductive exciting women more so than Mary Astor, Gladys George & Lee Patrick respectively as Brigid Wonderly, Iva Archer & Spades secretary Effie. Even though the women in the 1941 version were less appealing, for some reason they were more memorable than the more sizzling hot women in the 1931 version. Although I don't think Mary Astor was a great Brigid, I think Bette Davis or Barbara Stanwyck would've been better.It was these factors in addition to the definitive indelible 1941 version that contributed to why this pre-code version was reduced to a dim memory. Did people even remember this version by 1941 ?? Of the 3 versions of The Maltese Falcon it was the John Huston directed film that was the most faithful & closest adaptation that stayed true to Dashiell Hammett's book.It was John Huston's direction giving the film a dark, cynical, gloomy & atmospheric quality that permeates through the entire story. And the dramatic use of lighting & shadows & the expressive camera-work of Arthur Edeson bringing us into the world of film noir. This is why the 1941 version became the enduring classic cinematic quintessential prototype private detective thriller. Something that the 1931 version lacks to some extent.But this original version should be seen & enjoyed in it's own right as a forerunner to the later classic & also as a historical reference point as to what these early talkies were like before 1934. I would like to see this version again & obtain a copy on DVD & watch it back to back with the '41 classic. If you're into pre-code cinema by all means see this original version.

'The Maltese Falcon', one of the few exceptions to the rule that movie remakes are generally poorer than their originals, is best known as the Bogart version released in 1941.However, in the previous decade, Warner Brothers had made two other versions, of which the 1931 film was the first. Instead of Humphrey Bogart, we have the smirking Ricardo Cortez (who gives a new edge to Sam which is both entertaining and dangerous), while Mary Astor gives way to Bebe Daniels, a big star in early talkies who makes an interesting foil for the vain detective.'The Maltese Falcon', 1931-style, runs slightly less time than its more well-known namesake, but is tightly plotted and benefits from crisp delivery, a bit of pre-Code naughtiness, and small roles from the likes of Dudley Digges and Thelma Todd. It is an efficient and entertaining thriller which would be much higher regarded had the Bogart version not been made.Still, it holds up well in comparison. Perhaps not a classic, but good enough to be enjoyed in its own right.