Public Enemies - Review

First of all, let’s get something out of the way: this film looks like a dog’s dinner. If I made a film for $80 Million and it turned out to look like footage taken by a mother at her kid’s sports day, I’d have a serious re-think of what I’m at. And it really is one of the film’s biggest problems. This is a film set in, as the opening states, “a golden age” of bank robbery. We have authentic 1930’s garb, cars, weapons, buildings, and three of the highest profile actors you can find, all of which would typically be shown in a steamy back-lit manner with still close-ups and some vaseline smudged on the lense. But Michael Mann believes that the The Blair Witch Project is the future, and the future was ten years ago, and digital film is the past. Wait… what?

For anyone who doesn’t know, the film is about the final year of the life of John Dillinger, a famous American bank robber in the 20’s and 30’s. But it’s also about the people who chase him. And the woman he loves. Also there’s some history lessons in there. And a crime thriller. Ultimately, I don’t know what the hell this film was trying to say. Is it a biography? One year of someone’s life isn’t enough. Is it about undying love? It alludes to it, but no. Is it about the duality of two opposing characters and the interplay of their actions? Well, that would have been nice. Michael Mann’s films have usually been about one good and one bad character around which the whole plot revolves (Man Hunter, Heat, Collateral…. Miami Vice? God that film was such a bag of crap. “Do ye wanna go for a drink, loik?” Whatever, Mr. Hairy-faced Pumpkin).

In Public Enemies, you would expect some real magic between two fine actors such as Depp and Bale, but we’re treated to only one scene between the two, which is about a minute long (out of 2.5 hours…. what is it with films 2.5 hours long?), and it adds absolutely nothing to the development of the characters or the story. And crucially because…

It is one of Christian Bale’s worst performances. And I hate saying this, I really do. Look, I liked him in Terminator 4. I thought he was better in that than he was in Dark Knight. But in this… Christ, you can barely hear him. He is completely uncomfortable doing the Southern drawl, to the point where it really, really seems that he’s so focused on what he’s about to say so that he won’t mess it up. Maybe another lighting technician was prancing about in his view? I also don’t know where his character sits on the good-guy, bad-guy fence. In his first scene he guns down a criminal, and as he sits over the dying man the look of apathy on his face leads you to think that he’s a down to earth lawman who has no qualms with getting the job done. But for the remainder of the film there’s this wavering idea that he’s uncomfortable with death, yet he’s surrounded by it and has to come to terms with it. It’s not done very well. The other side of his coin is his obsession with catching John Dillinger, which, again, isn’t really explored until the very end. I say ‘explored’, but it’s literally one single line that gives this additonal insight into his character.

Johnny Depp is just okay. He plays an asshole who robbed banks and fancied some bird. Yeah? And? There is apparently, some Robin Hood aspect to John Dillinger which the film skims over thricely (that’s “three times” in mega-speak), but in no way are you care about this guy. There are one or two daring, cheeky interludes, only one of which I know happened in real life. The other is fanciful, and… well, okay. I’m not giving anything away here, but there’s one scene where Dillinger walks into the same cop-shop that Bale’s character operates out of, and pottersd about the office, perusing files on himself. What could have been a great scene of tension, or where one character could gain great insight into the other, turns into an empty gag.

Marion Cotillard plays a woman. …. Moving on.

Well, no, that’s not fair. She’s quite likeable, and you feel sorry for her - this poor fledgling being whisked away by the only guy that’ll treat her nice who turns out to be a cock. I mean, when the only guy who’ll whack your bonobo is one of the most wanted criminals in the country, that’s got to be a bit of a blow to your ego, right? And again, what could have been intricate, touching scenes of romance are shat upon by Mann’s enforcement of the Laws of The New Digital Paradise. Blurring, graining, horrible gain - it ruins some of the film’s more intimate moments.

I also have a bit of a problem with Michael Mann’s gun fights. A lot of the time, they don’t work. There has to be a logic to gun fights. You have to believe that wherever somebody is standing or positioned in a gun fight, they are open to certain vulnerabilities. Too often I find in his gun fights that people are still standing when they should have been dropped from the get-go. Rules have to be obeyed. If you’re not hiding directly behind a car, you’re dead. If you’re in the open for more than five seconds, you’re dead. If these rules aren’t obeyed, you can’t believe in what’s happening and you lose interest.

Despite all this, the film is not without its merits. It’s been a while since we’ve seen a movie in this period of time, and it’s refreshing. There’s also a lot of interesting history nuggets in there. People talk about modifying cars for greater speed to outrun the police, which I knew was true and even believe it lead to the birth of NASCAR. The beginnings of the FBI, Hoover’s involvement in the law, the lack of a Federal government’s involvement in state affairs - they’re interesting parts of American history that don’t get a lot of exposure. Despite the innaccuracies of gun fighting, the stand-off in the middle of the film, which was a real event, is extremely gripping and for once the film makes you a chance to care about some of the characters. There’s also some pretty stand-out performances by Jason Clarke as John Hamilton and Stephen Graham as Baby Face Nelson. Billy Crudup shows some good range by playing Hoover.

To sum up, it’s an honourable attempt at telling a relatively unintersting story but in an interesting point in time. It sags an awful lot, and if it weren’t for the period sets it wouldn’t be a whole lot to look at. The action is far too sparse for a film of this length, and the lack of drama fails to give it much impact. What could have been a return to the golden era of cinema ends up being a technically flawed film.

Review by: The Early Critic