Public Enemies

Michael Mann has talked recently about how he didn’t want the world of Public Enemies to seem like a recreation of the 1930s, he wanted the audience to feel that they were actually in 1933. If that’s true, he’s failed miserably, because what he’s recreated is an incredibly detailed and handsome world, but one that looks as if it’s been placed there waiting for a camera to film it. Everything’s a little too perfect and even when filming in the actual locations of John Dillinger’s escapades, it isn’t a universe that seems to exist beyond the camera’s frame. It’s a problem many of Michael Mann’s film have had, where he’s so intent on being utterly meticulous that nothing looks lived in and there’s no room for anything even approaching spontaneity. Even the dirt looks like it was placed there very specifically.

It’s a particular issue for a movie that’s otherwise so intent on stripping away the myth of a famous outlaw and presenting him and his cohorts for what they really were. But how can the criminal seem truly real when the world he inhabits never lets you forget you’re watching a movie? Mann’s use of digital cameras also has an effect on this, making everything seem rather modern and even less like the 1930s than it would if he’d used traditional film.

While Johnny Depp is as charming as always, his John Dillinger is not a nice man. Dillinger’s myth grew up around his charm and his supposed Robin Hood qualities, which were reported breathlessly by the papers of the day, but as the film is the first to admit, much of this was spun around him (although he wasn’t afraid to play with it) while he himself just wanted to rob banks – and you better not get in his way while he’s doing it. The movie mainly sticks to the facts, chronicling the events between Dillinger infamous prison break and his death at the age of 31, when he became a cause celebre, as famous as any movie star, with the title ‘Public Enemy No. 1’ engendering a sense of fear and awe to a Depression era populace. Like many other Mann movies, Public Enemies spends most of its running time revelling in the minutiae of procedure (whether the procedure of planning a crime or of catching the criminals), sporadically interspersing things with moments of violence.

It’s all very methodical, with Dillinger planning his robberies and Christian Bale’s FBI agent Melvin Purvis zeroing in on his prey. This is where the movie is most successful, slowly bringing a sense of inevitability to the final showdown. Bale does what he does best, being almost pathologically serious, but here it fits very well, and makes a great counterpoint to Depp’s Dillinger. The performances throughout are generally very good.

It’s been said that rather than 1930s gangster movies being based on the criminals, the gangsters of the time took their cues from Cagney and his crime film brethren. Depp’s performance is extraordinary for never seeming like impersonation, even when it’s apparent he’s having to play Dillinger as a man whose swagger is somewhat based on the movie stars he loved.

The movie also spends a lot of time detailing the relationship between Dillinger and Billie Frechette (Cotillard), although unfortunately while both actors play it well, the camera seems so dispassionate that it’s difficult to really care about the romance. In fact it’s Mann’s obsession with technical perfection that generally leaves little room for any of the story to truly grip the audience.

Eventually though Public Enemies is hamstrung by the same problem that afflicted another recent attempt to demythologise an outlaw, The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford. While the story is ostensibly about extricating the man from the myth, the camera tells another story. The beautifully mounted shots and almost reverential treatment of the subject creates a myth all of its own.  However rather than kowtowing to the myth of a specific criminal, both films are in love with the eras that could turn such individuals into legends.

It’s also slightly frustrating that for a film that takes so much time to do anything, it doesn’t really reveal an awful lot. Although you get to understand a certain amount about Dillinger’s sense of invincibility and his hatred of anything that stood in his way, the movie spends two hours and 20 minutes pretty much saying that this is all there is to know. When asked what he does, Dillinger says, “I rob banks”, and despite a lot of time spent detailing exactly how he did that, there isn’t really an awful lot more to say. In some ways it’s a fairly bold move, as saying much more would inevitably involve turning Dillinger back into myth. However, coupled with the fact that Mann’s visuals make the whole thing seem so much like a movie, it’s difficult not to feel that while great to look at and expertly performed, there’s something missing from the film’s heart. In fact it’s quite impressive they’ve managed to turn such an incredible story into something so uninvolving.

Overall Verdict: Great to look at and full of interesting detail, but it’s plastic-wrapped feel is ultimately pretty hollow.

Reviewer: Tim Isaac