Country: USA
Year: 2009
Oscar Elite Circle
In a couple of months from now, Academy Awards will be again naming the best of the films made in the recent past year of 2009. Film enthusiasts are already very excited about this. That is why many predictions have been made and uploaded in the internet about the movies that may be garnering a nomination or a couple or a number; lucky a movie of course if it will receive a nomination by a double digit. One of the noisiest films as of now expected to be in the elite circle of Oscar finalists is Michael Mann’s “Public Enemies”.
Lead by Academy Award multi-nominated Johnny Depp alongside Academy Award Best Actress winning Marion Cotillard and the most recent actor to play Batman, the popular Christina Bale, how could this movie go wrong? Based on the book of Bryan Burrough, the movie is about the notorious John Dillinger (Depp) as he lives his life of bank-robbing, and nothing else perhaps after he met the beautiful French-American Billie (Cotillard) and the serious assignment of Melvin Purvis to chase the elusive, gun and escape-wise Dillinger.
The Assassination of John Dillinger by a Nobody
The film is not the best movie I’ve watched ever, but I will be honest to say that it is a well-made film, and only if it is not a true to life story the movie could have outstretched its form into something that is absolutely stunning. But since the makers of the film I believe have been stuck to delivering the truest possible platform of the film from the real people within the real happening of the events almost a century ago, which is actually something that I can’t blame, “Public Enemies” though still remains to be a very good film jeopardized its overwhelming potential. I am particularly referring to the ending of the movie where Dillinger was shot. The scene is not a mess, but what happens is a mess, and that is nothing less but the fault of the undistinguishable cinematic roles of the people who are trying to blow the fatal shot to Dillinger. His death is very corrupted, at least cinematically; proof would be the sudden uselessness of Purvis in the film after the incident; and the necessary role of Agent Winstead from out of nowhere. Elemental zero to supporting hero is not welcome though in the world of narrative cinema. I am upset about this one and the only thing that is keeping me from going mad is the fact that it is what really happened in real life.
The Dark Knight versus John Dillinger and the Overrated Role
Having Johnny Depp sided by Christian Bale is an exciting commercial move by Universal Pictures. Casting the two of them in rat-cat plot will automatically create tension even in the slightest-set encounters. In the film though, I was very looking forward to the meet-up of the two. I love the cut to cut sequences of the free and symbolically prisoned John and of the bold and courageous Melvin. The feel that the two of them haven’t met yet but narratively, with the help of technical manipulations to the editing generates tremendous power to a very electrifying climax. I literally couldn’t wait for the two to clash. I ended up getting disappointed. Their first encounter when Purvis take a look at Dillinger at the jail is a very lame respond of director Mann to a supposedly real scorching hot encounter that will mark the beginning of an accelerating pressure to the two sides. Another missing element I came across with watching the movie is the lack of urgency in the part of Purvis to catch the bank notorious criminal. I really didn’t feel the intense, unrelenting, death-defying passion to catch Dillinger. This is something that I have always been looking for in a character after I have seen Jake Gylenhaal in David Fincher’s “Zodiac”, the problem doesn’t lie in Bale’s acting or whatever, he did his job good enough though. The problem is with the realization of the character from the script. The extrinsic role of Melvin Purvis is only a major one from the first hour of the movie and at the end keeps doing nothing but to deteriorate. If we are going to be stricter, I can even say that there has been an over-appreciation to the role that is manifested in the man-of-the-hour-introduction-to-the-press establishment for Purvis after defeating Pretty Boy Floyd, which is the exact reason why the film is eluded by the convincing success but actually irrelevant success of the character. The solution could have been simple—make the most out of Purvis. If only there is no need for keeping the real events in the story, then a more rigid, more nerve-racking, and more competition for survival and achievement could have been pulled up and more solid conflict by a solid protagonist and a solid antagonist. This is major problem in the “Public Enemies”, everything seems to be so clear but as deceiving as a Poison Ivy may be, you truly won’t recognize who these characters are. I am expecting a gigantic face-off between Dillinger and Purvis but it never happened in the film.
John and Billie
A love story within a crime-epic drama is not unusual, but this inclusion to the film makes possible its edge. The scenes between John and Billie are overpoweringly sultry, classy, and steaming. Very passionate making of the scenes for Mann, cinematographer Dante Spinotti, and even musical scorer Elliot Goldenthal. Also, the scenes of the two during the most private of their times or we can say the times they, especially John is most human. These are also the sequences that we witness the transition of John Dillinger to the simple John. But still on the other hand even though I see John in his purest moments, I still can’t dig up to his psyche. He seems very far, like he has his own world and that there is now ay to unlock it. I am not sure if this is such an intention, but if it is, then I commend the director and Depp for the very good job done, but if it is not, then I don’t commend myself for not appreciating the attempts of both Mann and Depp to make the character be real but I commend myself for recognizing the difference between filmmakers who can deliver any message straightforwardly and those who inevitably experienced an unusual difficulty. This is not my favourite performance from Depp, until now I still believe that his single best performance is really in “Finding Neverland”. He as John Dillinger, is not a bad thing but I don’t think it really helped him in his career because he isn’t brilliant in it at all. He has just been mediocre from start to finish. He looks harassed all the time and this is frustrating for me because I like Depp but his interpretation probably is not really suiting what is supposed to be suit or probably his personality simply just don’t suit that of John Dillinger. Marion Cotillard as Billie, John’s lover, on the other hand is fantastic. She is very beautiful from her initial to final scene. She has persuaded me that she really loves Dillinger, but the frustration commences for I can’t see the reason why she loves Dillinger. Sometimes we are under a wrong impression that when we hate a hate a character and that character is a villain/villain-hero, then that means that the actor had done his job really well. In my opinion, it should not be. You will love a character whether he is a villain or a hero. There is a difference between loving an evil character and hating one
The Sentimental Redemption
John Dillinger is a stiff and austere guy. The biggest challenge is underneath the endeavour of showing that this type of personalities can also feel warmth and that as much as any human being does, he can also love. The axis of emotion depends on his attraction to a woman Billie and I thought it wasn’t enough to compensate for all the apathetic reservoir of Dillinger. After the first hour and a half of the film, I was already worried by the lack of emotions I feel. He is in love for most part of the film however, that love didn’t lead him anywhere though until the time he cried when he sees her girlfriend arrested by the cops and he couldn’t do anything—one of two best parts of the film because it is the only time I realized he is human. The other one would be when he died and he whispered—Tell Billie, bye bye black bird (Black Bird is the title of the song to which the two loved to dance).
Cinematic Versus Historic
Talking about the technical aspects of the movie, sound recording and design are actually impressive. The musical score is also awesome especially when it comes to the chase scenes and the sensational moments between the two lovers. The cinematography is also good. I love the shadows all throughout the film, it is very consistent and complementing to the bank robbery the gang has been doing. The choices of shots are also good. There have right and important calls to when a close-up shot should be given especially when it comes to the flaunting dexterity of Purvis to shoot or when it comes to the craggy skill of Dillinger to fire a larger gun. The technical part is actually the better part of the film than the creative. If the film is going to have a good shot at the Oscar 2010, I am not placing my bet on it, but if ten nominees will be allowed this year, then probably. Technically it is good, and creatively it is not really bad, and it has the “heart” (even though very late in the film it appeared). Personally, I am sure that the final product Michael Mann and his team produced is only 40% of what it can really be had he prioritized being more cinematic than historic. I can’t blame him though for choosing the latter, but if I were him, I just won’t direct Public Enemies.
No comments:
Post a Comment