The Making of the Mob - AMC Mini-Series (began 6-15) (1 Viewer)

[Bob Magaw]

Eight part docudrama, Monday night, narrated by Ray Liotta, on the rise of Lucky Luciano, Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel. First episode fairly well done, re-airing it early next Monday, before the second and next episode 6-22.

 

[Jack White]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

 

[RBM]

Have it on the DVR, will probably check it out this weekend.

 

[peaces]

I didn't like the five minutes I gave it.

 

[jamny]

Have it on the DVR, will probably check it out this weekend.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

As long as Ray doesn't include any of his crappy tequila ads I'm in.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Both of the first two episodes also available to stream on AMC.com.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

First episode was solid but there was an error in fact that I found annoying.

They said, "Vito Genovese was a low-level Sicilian thug."

Genovese was not Sicilian.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

 

[RBM]

First episode was solid but there was an error in fact that I found annoying.

They said, "Vito Genovese was a low-level Sicilian thug."

Genovese was not Sicilian.

How the hell do you get that wrong on this kind of show? Embarrassing.

 

[RBM]

Just watched, nothing great. No better than those A&E biographies.

 

[QuizGuy66]

They get to the part about aliens yet?

-QG

 

[mquinnjr]

 

[Jack White]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

Hey, I'm just planting seeds.

But they're not for you. Nothing could possibly grow in the barren garden inside your head.

On this particular topic, it's absolutely appropriate:

Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet

 

[rockaction]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

Hey, I'm just planting seeds.

But they're not for you. Nothing could possibly grow in the barren garden inside your head.

On this particular topic, it's absolutely appropriate:

Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet

See, here's what weird. (And not about your posts.) What's weird is that Nock is so Rousseauian in nature, so much an adherent of that Oppenheimer quote about the origins of the state, that he perceives no natural right upon which private property can be legitimized. He argues that private property comes from force and force alone. That's the thesis behind Rousseau's Discourse On Inequality, and one that Nock seems to accept. Couple that with Nock's acceptance of a radical and legislative primacy over all other functions of the state, and it should make him anathema to anarchist capitalists, but he isn't. He's revered. I'm no Nock scholar, but I've read a fundamental essay or two, and my perception of him is that of an anarchist socialist who would be upset if somebody came for his property. A fool, really. The formation of the state is fundamental, and his belief in how it is formed (Rousseauian) and how the legal system within should be enacted (he's a radical legislative democrat) seem incompatible or potentially at odds with his desired results, always prone to usurpation simply because of the origins of the state and the means through which laws are enacted and checked. If there are to be any laws. If there are to be no laws, I still don't see how anything but force against force holds sway as a peaceful, voluntary, privatized thing.

As far as your comment goes. I was going to invert it and say, "The Making Of The RICO Act: A History Of The Mob ####### The American Citizen," and here I have just done so.

 

[joffer]

meh. nothing special.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

They get to the part about aliens yet?

Hitler & the Mob united together to stop the aliens from taking over both the moonshine & wiener schnitzel industries.

 

[Maik Jeaunz]

does it have any actual footage, or is it all actors?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

Hey, I'm just planting seeds.

But they're not for you. Nothing could possibly grow in the barren garden inside your head.

On this particular topic, it's absolutely appropriate:

Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet

Hidden History: Jack from FBG discusses where prison rapes meet halfway houses he's been in

 

[Jack White]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

Hey, I'm just planting seeds.

But they're not for you. Nothing could possibly grow in the barren garden inside your head.

On this particular topic, it's absolutely appropriate:

Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet

Hidden History: Jack from FBG discusses where prison rapes meet halfway houses he's been in

That's actually pretty funny.

Inaccurate, but funny.

 

[RBM]

does it have any actual footage, or is it all actors?

Just actors with commentary from actors, writers, etc...mixed in.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

does it have any actual footage, or is it all actors?

Just actors with commentary from actors, writers, etc...mixed in.

I feel like we've seen enough of the real life photos and clips anyway. I was hoping this would shed some new light however, especially on Costello and Genovese who were largely written out of mainstream coverage of the era. I am also hoping they talk about Luchese who was probably the most brilliant business man in organized crime.

 

[RBM]

does it have any actual footage, or is it all actors?

Just actors with commentary from actors, writers, etc...mixed in.

I feel like we've seen enough of the real life photos and clips anyway. I was hoping this would shed some new light however, especially on Costello and Genovese who were largely written out of mainstream coverage of the era. I am also hoping they talk about Luchese who was probably the most brilliant business man in organized crime.

Was hoping they'd focus more on the Castellammarese stuff, but doesn't seem like it. Looks like it might be just another dramatized "Luciano is the King" show.

 

[Jack White]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

Hey, I'm just planting seeds.

But they're not for you. Nothing could possibly grow in the barren garden inside your head.

On this particular topic, it's absolutely appropriate:

Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet

See, here's what weird. (And not about your posts.) What's weird is that Nock is so Rousseauian in nature, so much an adherent of that Oppenheimer quote about the origins of the state, that he perceives no natural right upon which private property can be legitimized. He argues that private property comes from force and force alone. That's the thesis behind Rousseau's Discourse On Inequality, and one that Nock seems to accept. Couple that with Nock's acceptance of a radical and legislative primacy over all other functions of the state, and it should make him anathema to anarchist capitalists, but he isn't. He's revered. I'm no Nock scholar, but I've read a fundamental essay or two, and my perception of him is that of an anarchist socialist who would be upset if somebody came for his property. A fool, really. The formation of the state is fundamental, and his belief in how it is formed (Rousseauian) and how the legal system within should be enacted (he's a radical legislative democrat) seem incompatible or potentially at odds with his desired results, always prone to usurpation simply because of the origins of the state and the means through which laws are enacted and checked. If there are to be any laws. If there are to be no laws, I still don't see how anything but force against force holds sway as a peaceful, voluntary, privatized thing.

As far as your comment goes. I was going to invert it and say, "The Making Of The RICO Act: A History Of The Mob ####### The American Citizen," and here I have just done so.

I think you must be confusing Nock with Locke.

 

[rockaction]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

Hey, I'm just planting seeds.

But they're not for you. Nothing could possibly grow in the barren garden inside your head.

On this particular topic, it's absolutely appropriate:

Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet

See, here's what weird. (And not about your posts.) What's weird is that Nock is so Rousseauian in nature, so much an adherent of that Oppenheimer quote about the origins of the state, that he perceives no natural right upon which private property can be legitimized. He argues that private property comes from force and force alone. That's the thesis behind Rousseau's Discourse On Inequality, and one that Nock seems to accept. Couple that with Nock's acceptance of a radical and legislative primacy over all other functions of the state, and it should make him anathema to anarchist capitalists, but he isn't. He's revered. I'm no Nock scholar, but I've read a fundamental essay or two, and my perception of him is that of an anarchist socialist who would be upset if somebody came for his property. A fool, really. The formation of the state is fundamental, and his belief in how it is formed (Rousseauian) and how the legal system within should be enacted (he's a radical legislative democrat) seem incompatible or potentially at odds with his desired results, always prone to usurpation simply because of the origins of the state and the means through which laws are enacted and checked. If there are to be any laws. If there are to be no laws, I still don't see how anything but force against force holds sway as a peaceful, voluntary, privatized thing.

As far as your comment goes. I was going to invert it and say, "The Making Of The RICO Act: A History Of The Mob ####### The American Citizen," and here I have just done so.

I think you must be confusing Nock with Locke.

Nooo…c'mon. It's not contract theory or the desired way in which a state is borne, it's the actual way in which a state is borne. Read Nock's Anarchists's Progress. Therein you'll find how the state is formed, and why it is so similar to Rousseau. Rousseau does not argue that the state is borne of contract theory, but that it is borne much like Nock's.

Nock: I then discovered that the matter had, indeed, been investigated by scientific methods, and that all the scholars of the Continent knew about it, not as something new or startling, but as a sheer commonplace. The State did not originate in any form of social agreement, or with any disinterested view of promoting order and justice.Far otherwise. The State originated in conquest and confiscation, as a device for maintaining the stratification of society permanently into two classes — an owning and exploiting class, relatively small, and a propertyless dependent class. Such measures of order and justice as it established were incidental and ancillary to this purpose; it was not interested in any that did not serve this purpose; and it resisted the establishment of any that were contrary to it. No State known to history originated in any other manner, or for any other purpose than to enable the continuous economic exploitation of one class by another. - Albert Jay Nock, Anarchist's Progress

Rousseau: Rousseau's discussion begins with an analysis of a natural man who has not yet acquired language or abstract thought. He then considers the origin of society:

“ The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody. ” — Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality, 1754

Locke: GOD having made man such a creature, that in his own judgment, it was not good for him to be alone, put him under strong obligations of necessity, convenience, and inclination to drive him into society, as well as fitted him with understanding and language to continue and enjoy it. The first society was between man and wife, which gave beginning to that between parents and children; to which, in time, that between master and servant came to be added: and though all these might, and commonly did meet together, and make up but one family, wherein the master or mistress of it had some sort of rule proper to a family; each of these, or all together, came short of political society, as we shall see, if we consider the different ends, ties, and bounds of each of these.

Radically, radically different.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

does it have any actual footage, or is it all actors?

Just actors with commentary from actors, writers, etc...mixed in.

I feel like we've seen enough of the real life photos and clips anyway. I was hoping this would shed some new light however, especially on Costello and Genovese who were largely written out of mainstream coverage of the era.I am also hoping they talk about Luchese who was probably the most brilliant business man in organized crime.

Was hoping they'd focus more on the Castellammarese stuff, but doesn't seem like it. Looks like it might be just another dramatized "Luciano is the King" show.

Yeah the Castellamare del golfo angle would have been awesome. And yeah, seems like this will largely center around Luciano. The only stuff with him that fascinates me is when they deported him. He lived in Naples for a time and owned a pizzeria that catered to Americans who lived in and around Naples. That and his activity in narcotics that pretty much lasted up until the Pizza connection case in the 80s where drugs were brought in from Turkey and the middle east and processed in Italy for shipment throughout the world.

I guess all that would be boring to some unless they made sure to include all the dead bodies involved.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

Hey, I'm just planting seeds.

But they're not for you. Nothing could possibly grow in the barren garden inside your head.

On this particular topic, it's absolutely appropriate:

Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet

See, here's what weird. (And not about your posts.) What's weird is that Nock is so Rousseauian in nature, so much an adherent of that Oppenheimer quote about the origins of the state, that he perceives no natural right upon which private property can be legitimized. He argues that private property comes from force and force alone. That's the thesis behind Rousseau's Discourse On Inequality, and one that Nock seems to accept. Couple that with Nock's acceptance of a radical and legislative primacy over all other functions of the state, and it should make him anathema to anarchist capitalists, but he isn't. He's revered. I'm no Nock scholar, but I've read a fundamental essay or two, and my perception of him is that of an anarchist socialist who would be upset if somebody came for his property. A fool, really. The formation of the state is fundamental, and his belief in how it is formed (Rousseauian) and how the legal system within should be enacted (he's a radical legislative democrat) seem incompatible or potentially at odds with his desired results, always prone to usurpation simply because of the origins of the state and the means through which laws are enacted and checked. If there are to be any laws. If there are to be no laws, I still don't see how anything but force against force holds sway as a peaceful, voluntary, privatized thing.

As far as your comment goes. I was going to invert it and say, "The Making Of The RICO Act: A History Of The Mob ####### The American Citizen," and here I have just done so.

I think you must be confusing Nock with Locke.

Nooo…c'mon. It's not contract theory or the desired way in which a state is borne, it's the actual way in which a state is borne. Read Nock's Anarchists's Progress. Therein you'll find how the state is formed, and why it is so similar to Rousseau. Rousseau does not argue that the state is borne of contract theory, but that it is borne much like Nock's.

Nock: I then discovered that the matter had, indeed, been investigated by scientific methods, and that all the scholars of the Continent knew about it, not as something new or startling, but as a sheer commonplace. The State did not originate in any form of social agreement, or with any disinterested view of promoting order and justice.Far otherwise. The State originated in conquest and confiscation, as a device for maintaining the stratification of society permanently into two classes — an owning and exploiting class, relatively small, and a propertyless dependent class. Such measures of order and justice as it established were incidental and ancillary to this purpose; it was not interested in any that did not serve this purpose; and it resisted the establishment of any that were contrary to it. No State known to history originated in any other manner, or for any other purpose than to enable the continuous economic exploitation of one class by another. - Albert Jay Nock, Anarchist's Progress

Rousseau: Rousseau's discussion begins with an analysis of a natural man who has not yet acquired language or abstract thought. He then considers the origin of society:

“ The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody. ” — Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality, 1754

Locke: GOD having made man such a creature, that in his own judgment, it was not good for him to be alone, put him under strong obligations of necessity, convenience, and inclination to drive him into society, as well as fitted him with understanding and language to continue and enjoy it. The first society was between man and wife, which gave beginning to that between parents and children; to which, in time, that between master and servant came to be added: and though all these might, and commonly did meet together, and make up but one family, wherein the master or mistress of it had some sort of rule proper to a family; each of these, or all together, came short of political society, as we shall see, if we consider the different ends, ties, and bounds of each of these.

Radically, radically different.

Is this Slavoj Zizek?

 

[rockaction]

Is this Slavoj Zizek?

Awesome.

I looked him up one day. I could only hope, really. Except I'm a classical liberal who considers himself an adherent of the old capitalists that write about morality, the political understanding of the importance of labor, and the people that provide it.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Is this Slavoj Zizek?

Awesome.

I looked him up one day. I could only hope, really. Except I'm a classical liberal who considers himself an adherent of the old capitalists that write about morality, the political understanding of the importance of labor, and the people that provide it.

comparison based on style, not content.

 

[rockaction]

Is this Slavoj Zizek?

Awesome.

I looked him up one day. I could only hope, really. Except I'm a classical liberal who considers himself an adherent of the old capitalists that write about morality, the political understanding of the importance of labor, and the people that provide it.

comparison based on style, not content.

I gathered.

 

[Jack White]

I'll be waiting for the sequel, The Making of the Mob: The US Constitution.

Dude, does it ever stop with you? At some point you even have to get sick of yourself don't you?

Hey, I'm just planting seeds.

But they're not for you. Nothing could possibly grow in the barren garden inside your head.

On this particular topic, it's absolutely appropriate:

Hidden History: Where Organized Crime and Government Meet

See, here's what weird. (And not about your posts.) What's weird is that Nock is so Rousseauian in nature, so much an adherent of that Oppenheimer quote about the origins of the state, that he perceives no natural right upon which private property can be legitimized. He argues that private property comes from force and force alone. That's the thesis behind Rousseau's Discourse On Inequality, and one that Nock seems to accept. Couple that with Nock's acceptance of a radical and legislative primacy over all other functions of the state, and it should make him anathema to anarchist capitalists, but he isn't. He's revered. I'm no Nock scholar, but I've read a fundamental essay or two, and my perception of him is that of an anarchist socialist who would be upset if somebody came for his property. A fool, really. The formation of the state is fundamental, and his belief in how it is formed (Rousseauian) and how the legal system within should be enacted (he's a radical legislative democrat) seem incompatible or potentially at odds with his desired results, always prone to usurpation simply because of the origins of the state and the means through which laws are enacted and checked. If there are to be any laws. If there are to be no laws, I still don't see how anything but force against force holds sway as a peaceful, voluntary, privatized thing.

As far as your comment goes. I was going to invert it and say, "The Making Of The RICO Act: A History Of The Mob ####### The American Citizen," and here I have just done so.

I think you must be confusing Nock with Locke.

Nooo…c'mon. It's not contract theory or the desired way in which a state is borne, it's the actual way in which a state is borne. Read Nock's Anarchists's Progress. Therein you'll find how the state is formed, and why it is so similar to Rousseau. Rousseau does not argue that the state is borne of contract theory, but that it is borne much like Nock's.

Nock: I then discovered that the matter had, indeed, been investigated by scientific methods, and that all the scholars of the Continent knew about it, not as something new or startling, but as a sheer commonplace. The State did not originate in any form of social agreement, or with any disinterested view of promoting order and justice.Far otherwise. The State originated in conquest and confiscation, as a device for maintaining the stratification of society permanently into two classes — an owning and exploiting class, relatively small, and a propertyless dependent class. Such measures of order and justice as it established were incidental and ancillary to this purpose; it was not interested in any that did not serve this purpose; and it resisted the establishment of any that were contrary to it. No State known to history originated in any other manner, or for any other purpose than to enable the continuous economic exploitation of one class by another. - Albert Jay Nock, Anarchist's Progress

Rousseau: Rousseau's discussion begins with an analysis of a natural man who has not yet acquired language or abstract thought. He then considers the origin of society:

“ The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody. ” — Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality, 1754

Locke: GOD having made man such a creature, that in his own judgment, it was not good for him to be alone, put him under strong obligations of necessity, convenience, and inclination to drive him into society, as well as fitted him with understanding and language to continue and enjoy it. The first society was between man and wife, which gave beginning to that between parents and children; to which, in time, that between master and servant came to be added: and though all these might, and commonly did meet together, and make up but one family, wherein the master or mistress of it had some sort of rule proper to a family; each of these, or all together, came short of political society, as we shall see, if we consider the different ends, ties, and bounds of each of these.

Radically, radically different.

I'm not seeing your conclusion here. I don't believe Nock was a follower of Rousseau's.

Nock made a distinction between government (localized, voluntary self-rule absent centralized coercion) and the State (anti-social, destructive).

"It may now be easily seen how great the difference is between the institution of government, as understood by Paine and the Declaration of Independence, and the institution of the State. Government may quite conceivably have originated as Paine thought it did, or Aristotle, or Hobbes, or Rousseau; whereas the State not only never did originate in any of those ways, but never could have done so. The nature and intention of government, as adduced by Parkman, Schoolcraft and Spencer, are social. Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing."

********************************************

"It will be clear to anyone who takes the trouble to think the matter through, that under a regime of natural order, that is to say under government, which makes no positive interventions whatever on the individual, but only negative interventions in behalf of simple justice – not law, but justice – misuses of social power would be effectively corrected; whereas we know by interminable experience that the State’s positive interventions do not correct them. Under a regime of actual individualism, actually free competition, actual laissez-faire – a regime which, as we have seen, can not possibly coexist with the State – a serious or continuous misuse of social power would be virtually impracticable."

Nock considered himself a philosophical anarchist, so it should be no mystery that he was an influence on later anarcho-capitalists:

"There are two methods or means, and only two, whereby man’s needs and desires can be satisfied. One is the production and exchange of wealth; this is the economic means. The other is the uncompensated appropriation of wealth produced by others; this is the political means. …The State…is the organization of the political means."

 

[rockaction]

Yet The State, in Nock's opinion, does originate in the way in which Rousseau says it does according to the passages in my second post.

As for this: Government may quite conceivably have originated as Paine thought it did, or Aristotle, or Hobbes, or Rousseau; whereas the State not only never did originate in any of those ways, but never could have done so.

This is odd, considering that Rousseau's understandings of the beginning of government match up almost concept for concept with Nock's understanding of how the State originates. Both are negative understandings, and cynical ones, but they're almost exactly the same. Perhaps I need to read more on this.

This seems like it could be a semantic or definitional argument where one person distinguishes between the beginnings of society, and therefore government, or the beginnings of the State. Nock seems to view them as two very different things.

 

[Insein]

Had it on DVR. Think I'll delete.

 

[rockaction]

I think we have figured out our problem. I'm quoting Anarchist's Progress, you're focused on Our Enemy, The State. Indeed. Anarchist's Progress is 1927, Our Enemy, The State, is 1935.

Yet, as late as the early 1930s, according to Nock's memoirs, "I still believed that the masses of mankind are indefinitely improvable." By around 1935, however, he had become convinced that this belief would not withstand scrutiny. "I ended," he wrote, "by striking my colors as gracefully as possible, parted company with the theologians, with Mr. Jefferson, with Price, Priestley, Condorcet, Rousseau, Mme. De Stael, and went over to the opposition with head unbowed and withers still unwrung." - Mises Institute

 

[Doctor Detroit]

So I waited a while to watch episode II, but it's the same stuff and now with Boardwalk Empire facts and Al Capone who everyone already knows about.

Still nothing on the "Sicilian" Vito Genovese. They are also butchering all the names, it's not MORON-ZANO, it's MAR-ANZANO. Like mar-inara and ma-rina! I would have made them re-voice a lot of these pronunciation, it's pretty bad when you butcher the native language like Olive Garden and Macaroni Grill butcher the food.

They could have delved deeper into the circumstances around Rothstein's death also, again...something more interesting and fresh instead of the Capone carnival.

I did find something interesting when researching Sicilian mafiosi because of this show however. A good friend of mine who I was in the military with has a fairly unique Sicilian name. So I'm going through the names and his last name pops up as a high up in the Toronto Mafia family. So I sent him the link and he said, "yeah, we don't talk to that part of the family." He's not a bull####ter type either and as I said, his name is unique. Found that little exchange interesting. So thanks Episode I? He also sent me this little nugget, one of those girls is his 3rd cousin.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

I gave this 15 minutes. Total crap.

I'd rather go on a 5 hour car ride with Jack White than watch another 15.

 

[jamny]

I watched the first episode and liked it. I have a decent knowledge of the time period, not as much as some here probably, but still learned a couple of things.

I'll keep watching.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I gave this 15 minutes. Total crap.

I'd rather go on a 5 hour car ride with Jack White than watch another 15.

 

[jamny]

Finally finished this last night and enjoyed it very much. I knew a lot about the early Prohibition days and some of the more modern stories but there was a bunch in the middle that I didn't know about. Similar to another mini-series, The Men Who Built America, they use just the right amount of acting to tell the story. I'm sure they stretched the truth on occasions but it was a good primer for those who don't know a lot about the era.

We walk past the cemetery where many of them are buried and are planning to do a sight-seeing tour to find the graves in the near future.

What are some good books that go into detail more about that time period?

 

[Bob Magaw]

Finally finished this last night and enjoyed it very much. I knew a lot about the early Prohibition days and some of the more modern stories but there was a bunch in the middle that I didn't know about. Similar to another mini-series, The Men Who Built America, they use just the right amount of acting to tell the story. I'm sure they stretched the truth on occasions but it was a good primer for those who don't know a lot about the era.

We walk past the cemetery where many of them are buried and are planning to do a sight-seeing tour to find the graves in the near future.

What are some good books that go into detail more about that time period?

I haven't read yet, but downloaded LA Noir based on good reviews. It is told from an LA perspective, a dual bio of gangster Mickey Cohen (figures in James Ellroy's LA Quartet) and LA Police Chief William Bratton, and his war on organized crime. I think they made this into a mini-series?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

The Chicago version currently airing is much better than the first iteration IMO.  It concentrates on Capone, and based on the books I've read about him, not a bad dipiction.  Great? 

Watchable?