Public Enemies

Bon film !

No English

source: Public Enemies

I can't believe a director as accomplished as Michael Mann would produce a movie with this poor of a presentation. More than half the film consists of ultra zoom close ups. Are Johnny Depp's nose hairs really that camera worthy? Maybe they spent the entire budget on gathering this cast and had to hide their period piece shooting behind ultra zooms on two 1930's cars? The horrid and shaky camera work is far too distracting and often pulls the viewer right out of the film. Add to that a rather poor pace and a story that never allows you to connect with either lead and maybe this rating is too kind. For the most part, Dillinger's charm and savvy are lost as we never see what made him a competent bank robber or really why he was an infamous scoundrel. Bale's performance is monotone drab as is most of the running time of this very disappointing movie.

This film is a disappointment. Johnny Depp is rather good as the bank robber John Dillinger, and Christian Bale is not bad as Melvin Purvis, the agent chasing him. However, put simply, it feels rushed. The cinematography is ineffective and spastic, and the editing fails to make the story interesting. Perhaps these things needed more time given to them. It's actually boring, which is not what's expected of a gangster film. Without that attention to detail, it ends up simplistic but busy, a bad combination. The director of photography also did LA Confidential, so it's difficult to blame him for the uninteresting look of the movie. There are two chase scenes which echo each other, one through an orchard during the day and one through the woods at night, which were done well. Most of the action scenes are just bullets spraying everywhere while people run around, with only rare attention paid to constructing a coherent sequence of events. The camera is far too jerky, far too often. Michael Mann is probably to blame for all of this, as the director. Weak story, uninteresting flow, and visuals without enough punch add up to make this one a waste of time.

Whenever a Michael Mann movie comes out, I am besieged by expectations. This is one director whose style I seem to consistently like. The Insider, Heat, Collateral, The Last of the Mohicans, and yes.. I LOVED Miami Vice the movie (despite the many negative reviews it seemed to have got). So, when Public Enemies came out, and seeing Mann team up with Johnny Depp and Christian Bale, I knew I could not miss this. However, probably because of the high standards he has set for himself, I was a little disappointed with this. The story is about a gangster bank robber, John Dillinger(Johnny Depp), back in the '30's, who pulled off a couple of daring heists and prison breaks. He was generally considered a hero among the public, as this was during the years of the great depression and Dillinger was seen as someone who steals from the rich man. A fledging FBI, led by the peerless J. Edgar Hoover, decide to hunt him down so that they can grow the organization, and name him Public Enemy Number 1. Melvin Purvis(Christian Bale) is assigned the task of leading this group of agents. Johnny Depp is as usual great, but you get a feeling he would have been even better if the script had given enough scope to explore the character of Dillinger. The same goes with his love interest, played by Marillon Cotillard. Again, a wonderful actress, but at times the love story seemed forced into the story. Despite this, they have great chemistry. Which brings me to Christian Bale. This is an actor who has so much more to offer than the half baked roles he has been getting this year. You get a feeling this year that he is being offered big movies which don't give him a character he can bite his teeth into. First there was Terminator Salvation, and now this. In both, his character never really seemed into the movie as compared to the others. I'm waiting to see a movie again where he will assert himself. Despite the flaws, this is still a good movie from Mann. Just don't go in expecting it to out do his best.

Let me just start out by saying: This is a very, very good movie. If you're going to the movies this weekend, this is the one to see. The performances are really the highlight. Depp is perfectly nuanced as Dillinger. It's his most mature role to date. I don't really understand the flack he's giving for playing him as "empty". Subtle would be a better word. He's playing someone who always lives in the moment, and has accepted that he won't be around for a while. I think he captured this perfectly. Marion Cotillard is also perfectly fragile as Billie, his love interest. It's Bale, however, who really steals the movie. His portrayal is absolutely brilliant. He plays Melvin Purvis as professional, intimidating, and broken. Anyone who has seen his work should realize that his accent is spot on. He's also very subtle in his expressions, and this is one of his best performances, right up there with "Hard Times" and "American Psycho." The shoot out scenes are fantastic. I actually enjoyed the digital shooting much more than I thought I would. It really had voyeuristic feel that just can't be obtained with traditional 35mm. The visuals are across the board fantastic. The authentic places really stand out. I think the ending will really split viewers. I, for one, loved it. The last line is killer, and left me with a good impression of the film. Now the cons: The story spends too many scenes on Dillinger and Billie. The love story ends up feeling a bit contrived. I understand that Mann was going for an old gangster movie type of love dialogue, but it just didn't fit in. The movie had too much to say, and it leaves some subplots completely open. It almost seems sloppy. It should have been 30 minutes longer, with more of a focus on Purvis and J. Edgar Hoover (absolutely brilliantly played by Billy Crudup). Overall, go see this movie. This and Up are the best blockbusters of the summer so far.

I remember how I felt when I finally realized that Santa Claus did not exist, and I had that same feeling after viewing "Public Enemies" with Johnny Depp and Christian Bale. I never thought I'd see a day when these two fine actors would star in such a dull and uninteresting movie. Their fine acting aside, this movie has as much in common with other excellent biopics as Michael Moore does with presenting untainted and unedited truth. It's as though Michael Mann wrote too much, shot too much, had too much money to spend, and edited too little. I kept waiting for that magical moment when the movie would pick up and the excitement would grow, finally exploding in a dramatic climax that movie aficionados such as myself love. Never happened. Depp and Bale are at their best, but the tedious of the story-telling, the lack of character sympathy, and the over all cut-and-run of the editing created 140 minutes of boredom. "Public Enemies" is a 90 minute movie crammed into 140 minutes. Want to see a good Dillinger movie? Try "Dillinger" with Lawrence Tierney from 1945. Shorter, to the point, and unpretentious.

John Dillinger was a gangster legend who was adored, loathed, chased, admired, and detested by many. There are mixed elements to how people judged John Dillinger, and that was one the most admirable & authentic qualities to Director Michael Mann's John Dillinger gangster flick "Public Enemies". Mann wisely does not evolve into the entire biography of the Dillinger tale; there is no childhood chronology and no catastrophic life scarring moment. It is basically about a man choosing a life of crime in order to live fast and play hard, subconsciously aware to the fact that is will be not be infinite. Mann starts the film with Dillinger already at his height of his gangster popularity orchestrating another one of his "great escape from prison" schemes. Then once again, Johnny D. and his bad boy entourage are robbing banks and living the retro thug life. Dillinger then checks out and romances the lovely checkout coat girl Billie Frechette. Apparently, Johnny's fresh ways were successful in luring Ms. Freshette. During that era of the 1930's crime hike, many Americans were rooting for these public enemies to rob banks in order to show their dislike of American banks for their mismanagement which eventually was the catastrophic factor which caused The Great Depression. Not to undermine the fact that many were against the dreadfulness that Dillinger and his men caused by their heinous crimes. J. Edgar Hoover was during that time trying to formalize his Bureau of Investigation into a national police force which later became known as the FBI. But Hoover had to find ways to vacuum the U.S. Government into this political formalization. Therefore, he exploited the capture of outlaws as a way to elevate his Bureau of Investigations. He then delegated the task of capturing Public Enemy Number 1, Dillinger himself, to top agent Melvin Purvis. The central plot line shootout of "Public Enemies" which Mann exhibits is the relentless pursuit of Purvis and Co. in capturing the charismatic Dillinger and his men. Johnny Depp was a real straight-shooter with his enigmatic but bulls-eye performance as Dillinger. Christian Bale's acting pursuit as one of the elite in the biz took another leap higher with his driven work here as Purvis. Marion Cotillard proved that she suffered no acting letdown, after her Best Actress Oscar, with her strong supportive work here as the Dillinger gal Billie. Speaking of Billies, Billy Crudup crudely transformed himself into J. Edgar Hoover with authentic prowess. Maybe I was hit too hard with Ronan Bennett's complex screenplay, but at times I was lost with "Public Enemies" verbose rounds. Nevertheless, it was Mann who captures his audience by Mannly displaying the Dillinger crime life and his ultimate demise in sheer entertainment fashion. "Public Enemies" might not be the #1 film in my "most wanted" 2009 film list at years end, but most probably will be gunned up as one of the best of the year. ***** Excellent

"Public Enemies" is poorly directed, poorly acted, poorly shot, and especially, poorly written. At no point was I convinced by any of the performances. Depp walks around looking smug throughout the film. That's not acting. I can look smug, anybody can look smug. All of the other performances were also two-dimensional (as in flat), but that has as much to do with the way the characters were written and the way the cast members were directed in their performances as it does with the actors' own abilities. So far as the screenplay is concerned, when you take a real-life bank robber who did in fact shoot and kill innocent people and make him look heroic, that is disgusting. I live in Zion, Illinois, halfway between Chicago and Milwaukee. Much of Dillinger's life of crime is within an hour's drive from my home. His crimes and actions are well-known around here. He was a disgusting criminal, and it was a great day when he was gunned down outside the Biograph Theater. Johnny Depp tried to justify Dillinger's life of crime by stating that he didn't rob people, but banks, in his promotional appearances. What does he think a bank is? When you rob a bank, you rob everyone who does business with that bank. If I have an account at a bank, whether it be a savings account, a checking account, a CD, or whatever, I am robbed, too, if that bank is robbed, because it is my money that is being taken, not the bank's money. Depp's words are nonsense. He bought into the legend instead of the facts. Another awful thing about this film is the camera-work and cinematography. The camera moves and moves and moves, hardly sitting still and focusing on anything. Hold the camera still! Let's see a shot that lasts for more than a few seconds! This film is offensive and it's the worst film I have seen at the theater so far this year.