Public Enemies (Mann, 2009) — The Reviews Thread

[matrixrok9]

Originally Posted by Dr. Mantle

Nothing will ever top the gunfight in Heat, so the answer is no.

How would you rate the gun battles compared to other Mann flicks?

[Suprmallet]

Originally Posted by RocShemp

I hate comments like "the detail and depth of field are phenomenal in the dark scenes, but the bright flaring, occasional unnatural movements and excessive detailing of skin flaws remain annoying" when it comes to digital video. Film, if correctly focused, is just as detailed. Why do people think video magically shows detail that film does not?

It's not a question of more or less detail, it's how the detail is presented. Film uses a chemical process for developing, which gives the images a more organic feel. Video is much more sharp, not more detailed, and this makes small things jump out at you more because of their contrast, not because you can see more fine details.

[candyrocket786]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC

Question: Does the big gunfight here top or at least at the same level as the one in Heat?

What about the shoot out at Club Fever? Anything in this film top that?

[tucker]

Originally Posted by Dr. Mantle

Nothing will ever top the gunfight in Heat, so the answer is no.

what about the opening bank robbery scene of the dark knight?

[gongon78]

Originally Posted by candyrocket786

What about the shoot out at Club Fever? Anything in this film top that?

The gun fight in Heat was one of the all time BEST. The gun fights in this movie are completely different, and in no way should it be compared to Heat.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Is it more badass or not? I'm not talking about is it a bigger louder or whatever..is it "cooler"? I know any and all gun fights have to compare to Heat but as comparison...how good are the gun fights?

[gongon78]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC

Is it more badass or not? I'm not talking about is it a bigger louder or whatever..is it "cooler"? I know any and all gun fights have to compare to Heat but as comparison...how good are the gun fights?

See...I don't want to accidentally spoil the movie for anyone who is planning to see it this weekend.

It's 'different', and no way should it be compared to Heat. The gun fight in Heat is the ultimate BADASS. If I had to rate Heat's gun battle between a 1 - 10, I'd give a 11.

The gun battle in Public Enemy is good, but I just can't compare it to Heat because I can't give a 11. I'd say it's more of 7-9, just because it's completely different.

[Dean Kousoulas]

Just came back from the midnight showing. Maybe I will collect my thoughts better once I sleep on it, but I was very disapointed. Michael Mann was of course on top of his game, and Depp/Bale & the rest of the cast delivered, but I was so let down by the script. I don't understand how you can take a character as interesting as Dillinger, and spend 2 and a half hours without any substance to it. The whole time I was watching I kept asking myself, "Why should I care about any of these characters?" The New Yorker review was right, the movie was emotionally neutered.

There was no backstory. Historical figures from the era came and went without telling us why they are so important. The only real emotion I got was

Spoiler:

seeing Dillinger react to the gangster movie at the theater, and during Dillinger's death when he stared down his would be killer and frightened him enough to back off

[Solid Snake PAC]

Originally Posted by gongon78

See...I don't want to accidentally spoil the movie for anyone who is planning to see it this weekend.

It's 'different', and no way should it be compared to Heat. The gun fight in Heat is the ultimate BADASS. If I had to rate Heat's gun battle between a 1 - 10, I'd give a 11.

The gun battle in Public Enemy is good, but I just can't compare it to Heat because I can't give a 11. I'd say it's more of 7-9, just because it's completely different.

Well you have me sold. I can't wait...obviously it'd be a different beast considering what era it's in. I was going to see it tomorrow after class anyway...just wanted more details about the gun fight. So I'll come back and report my findings.

[Jaymole]

I am hoping this performs really well at the B.O. We need more R Rated, Adult oriented films coming out in the summer.

[Mr. Cinema]

Currently 56% on Rotten Tomatoes.

[Jaymole]

Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema

Currently 56% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Looking at all those reviews, Doctor Gonzo adds it up to be 100%

[slop101]

Originally Posted by Dean Kousoulas

Maybe I will collect my thoughts better once I sleep on it, but I was very disapointed.

I have to agree with this. While I didn't hate the movie or anything, I felt really disconnected from it (even more than the typical Mann flick), as the movie had absolutely no heart and didn't mean anything to me. I'd say it was maybe a smidge better than Miami Vice.

[arminius]

Originally Posted by slop101

I have to agree with this. While I didn't hate the movie or anything, I felt really disconnected from it (even more than the typical Mann flick), as the movie had absolutely no heart and didn't mean anything to me. I'd say it was maybe a smidge better than Miami Vice.

I still want to see it but this sounds really disappointing to me. JD was the most sympathetic of the outlaws in those days. He was not a violent killer and probably was the most "Robin Hood" ideal of the bunch.

[mdc3000]

Hugely fucking disappointed. I usually like Mann's work because it's technically proficient while still having enough character and plot to pull you into the world and immerse you. He is typically a master at creating tension and keeping us involved... I enjoyed Miami Vice despite finding it a little cold, muddled and slightly uninvolving, but there was enough there to keep me interested... With Public Enemies there was literally only 40 minutes where I was anything but bored.

Having two of the best actors in the business (Depp and Bale) in a film that should be a cat and mouse thriller, would seem like a great recipe for success but we're NEVER given any insight into either man. I know nothing more about John Dillinger walking out than I did walking in, and I didn't know very much except the broad strokes. Purvis sounds like an interesting man, especially with the note at the end that he took his own life, but there is nothing in the film to get me involved. Things in this movie just seemed to HAPPEN. I was watching a bank robbery, but wasn't excited/thrilled/worried etc. about it - I was just sort of watching stuff happen that I had no emotional involvement in... we don't care about any of the characters so there are NO STAKES. None of the actions carry any weight.

I liked Depp and Bale but they needed more to do. The storyline with Cotillard lacked any spark to make me believe that these two people loved each other - so I didn't really care about their scenes together because I just wasn't feeling it... the movie feels hollow.

There are about 40 minutes that I thought really worked: Dillinger's escape, the forest gunfight, the finale etc. but having 100 minutes worth of padding didn't do the movie any favours. I don't know how Mann can take a story that sounds mundane like THE INSIDER and make a crackling, compelling thriller, but then takes something that is as exciting and sexy as robbing banks and makes it seem like paint drying. 2 out of 5.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Just saw it. I liked it. It's not great..it's just..middleground average..but shot very well which ups the quality. I LOVED the Bohemian shoot out scene..that was cool. It wasn't better than Heat but like someone else said it's enjoyably different which is good. I felt no connection to the two leads..though well acted. The closest we come to getting some meat on Purvis is actually in his Intro to the film. Who he is in that scene is essentially what he is throughout the film. But...that's all we get and it's not a lot. We get more Dillinger for sure..which is nice..but still not enough for us to hold on to.

That scene at the Chicago office..was odd. It wasn't necessary, felt like it was trying to get the audience to really enjoy what Dillinger was and his chivalry nature. The gun fights are nice for sure. I liked it for what it was. The film edits or whatever paces the film strange. It seems like you can take out any scene and put it somewhere else and it'd fit fine there for the most part. It's sense of linear storytelling is broken by the editing or the actual elements used in the scene. There's no strong unity in them.

THE HD element is something I'm still wondering about. The camera focuses on character while the environment is blurred around as he moves...I don't know if that's just the way HD does it or not but...it seemed to work well. The detail from the HD really works on still scenes but...in high speed motion actions it's a hit or miss. The Bohemian shoot out shows this. There are some shots that benefit from it but others that just fall flat. Also...the gunfire in the night is very well illuminated. Mann really really knows how to shoot gunfire. If anything...watch the film for the shoot outs, very well shot and played out.

Regardless...I liked the film. It was good. Not Heat good but...good. I can give it a B..maybe a B+ for the sake of it being a well shot film.

[scott1598]

Review:
it was good. not nearly as good as i was hoping though. 3/5

the first hour was pretty ho hum and forgettable. the last hour or so it got better. there were flashes of brilliance and some scenes that worked so well, like when Dillinger went into the Chicago police station.

the romance between him and Cotillard was not done up well, though she was the perfect 30's style chick. it just came across as flat.

most of the movie was merely good. there was nothing great or particularly done well. again some scenes, but the characters were not fleshed out at all, including Dillinger.

there was no scheming, not a lot of thrills and really no suspense. i wanted more caper and less everything else.

Stand-outs:
i thought the standout performances were Jason Clarke as "Red" and Stephen Graham as "Baby Face Nelson". Clarke was the perfect and more heart wrenching second banana to Depp's Dillinger and for what he was in he just had this presence on the screen. Graham was over-the-top and i think that played perfectly for this character.

the rest: Bale, Depp, Crudup, Cotillard just seem to dial it in and nothing was particularly awe striking and that was disappointing. i expect more from Bale and especially Depp and there was much of anything. which isn't to say they were bad performances, just nothing too great.

Wrap-up:
again, there was a lot to like, but a lot really fell flat and that is the one, disheartening word i use to describe most of the movie.

also, i think we got rooked in the sound dept. as the theater (usually a good, reliable theater too) seemed to have only 2.0 where it was very low and seemed front loaded. i think they didn't hit the volume or the surround sound switch

[scott1598]

just read this review...
For people who loved Heat, this is a tour de force.
Cammila Albertson
TV Guide's Movie Guide

and in no way should this be compared to "Heat" and in no way does it come close to the cinematic beauty that it was.

[MBoyd]

First off, I have never seen a Michael Mann film I liked. I did go in with high expectations because of the cast. Depp was stellar. The gunshots were probably some of the loudest and most powerful I ever heard in the theater.

I rated it two stars. It was a borefest for me. I was checking the time. Not only that, it's just an ugly film. It looked like television to me. The HD video transfer to film looked smeary in a lot of it. Bad cinematography choice. And that's what sticks out most in my mind and why I rated it as low as I did.

[chris_sc77]

I liked it a lot.
4 stars out of 5.
The 2nd half was better than the first half though thats for sure.
It also had quite a few problems. The digital looked bad at many times during manily the first half it seems. That or i just got used to t after a while. Some of the actors appeared blurry almost and out of focus. Other times it looked like a shot out of a videogame.
But there were also times it looked quite good also.
The action scenes were mostly very good. The shootout at night in the woods being the highlight of the film for me.

[Mr.Briggs]

Glad I saw it in the theater because I might have blind bought it on dvd otherwise. It was mildly entertainng but not a movie I'd care to see again.

[FantasticVSDoom]

I agree with Ebert's review... Its a very good, not great film. Shootout was great, and I liked the end. It was hard to pick up the dialogue at the beginning of the film, which Im starting to get used to for Mann's films.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Also...I love that song that he plays in several sections of the film. And was predominantly used in the trailers for it. Really gets the blood pumping.

[scott1598]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC

Also...I love that song that he plays in several sections of the film. And was predominantly used in the trailers for it. Really gets the blood pumping.

"Ten Million Slaves" ...Otis Taylor

i dl'd as soon as i saw the trailer

i did think that once was enough and the rest played it out a bit.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Yeah..I've been listening to it nonstop since I came from the theater. Very engrossing.