I had first watched this on the big screen as part of the Italian B-movie retrospective held during the 2004 Venice Film Festival (where 6 features by Di Leo were shown); back then, I didn't like it - rating it ** and feeling that it was rather unbalanced by the vulgar comedy relief (though typical of Italian films during this era),especially when compared to the director's other relatively more sober stuff (which had proved my first encounter with his work)!

Watching it again as part of a mini-tribute to its star, Jack Palance (who passed away recently),I found myself a lot more receptive to it; Di Leo dabbled most often in the crime genre and, as can be deduced from the title, this one falls into that category: the plot, dealing with a gang war (one faction controlled by Palance and the other by Edmund Purdom),is no great shakes but, at its centre is a revenge plan involving Palance and young misfit Al Cliver (whose identity is unknown to the 'boss'); this element gives it an undeniable edge, and the exciting climax takes place at a massive abandoned slaughterhouse - where an old betrayal and murder had taken place.

As is typical of the director, the action is pretty constant and always dynamic - aided by a fine eclectic score by Luis Enrique Bacalov; there's a discreet amount of nudity and, as I said, a slight overdose of comedy: however, as I watched more films by Di Leo (totaling nine so far),I realized that this was basically an idiosyncrasy of his (evident even in a straight melodrama such as LA SEDUZIONE [1973]) but, in any case, I generally appreciated its style of humor now - especially when delivered by Di Leo regular Vittorio Caprioli (my favorite bit occurs towards the end, when he shoots the bad guys at close range with a bunch of guns he purchased for an eventual showdown but, constantly missing the mark, reasons to himself that the weapons must be defective and, therefore, he ought to return them and file a complaint to boot!).

Palance is suitably sinister and imposing - even if he probably spends more time being had, so to speak, than dishing it out! In the end, what's missing from the film vis-a'-vis Di Leo's other genre work is a strong hero (i.e. a credible opponent to Palance) in the vein of Gastone Moschin (from THE CONTRACT [1972]),Mario Adorf (from THE Italian CONNECTION [1972]) and Henry Silva (from WIPEOUT! [1973])...

Rulers of the City does have a lot going for it. It does fall short of being great, and Fernando Di Leo and Jack Palance have done better in their respective careers, but this is not even close to being career-worsts for either and is a very respectable film overall.

The locations are splendid, and the gritty roughness of the photography and clever (without being too much or too dizzying) camera angles capture it more than ideally. There is also a dynamite score, exhilarating action scenes (the final shootout being the prime example) and mostly above-decent direction, if in need of more tension in places. The script is tight and more light-hearted than Di Leo's Milieu trilogy, but it was light-heartedness and witty humour that didn't feel too misplaced, and the story is at least engrossing and swiftly paced on the most part.

Casting-wise, Rulers of the City is very much a mixed bag, with the best performances being from a sinister Jack Palance (though he was deserving of more screen time) and a lively and lots-of-fun, without being too clownish, Vittorio Napoli as the film's most colourful character. Harry Baer has some charming moments too and Giselda Hahn brings a little heart. Al Clivar however does show his limitations as an actor in a somewhat one-note performance and Edmund Perdum is rather stiff in an underwritten role.

Aside from a slow-motion dream-like opening sequence, that was quite striking if perhaps not necessary, Rulers of the City does take too long to get going and the story only really comes to life once Palance appears. The film was in need of more tension and suspense, and stronger writing for the villains (who were underutilised and never really developed, and this is including Palance's character) would have helped. The final shoot-out is great, but ends a little anti-climactically. And I do have to agree about the homo-erotic undertones and homosexuality hints being clumsily written and out of place, which did feel the film a bizarre feel at times.

Overall, respectable but could have been better. 6/10 Bethany Cox

This appears to be a bad knock-off of a gangster film. In the opening scene we see Scarface (Jack Palance) get his scar. He shoots a man several times, as the man waves his arms, going into a comic death scene, he throws a glass ashtray (?) at the robber and nicks him in the face. This robber goes on to become a tough crime boss who smoke cigarettes with a long cigarette holder.

Tony (Harry Baer) is a strong arm collection man with a rich cousin in Brazil. He meets another collector, one who works for Scarface and has less acting credentials. They devise a plan to scam some money and go to Brazil.

The dubbing was bad. The transfer was bad. Acting and plot were bad. Fat men in muscle tees.

Parental Guide: F-bomb (I think- bad sound too) brief nudity.