Thursday, July 9, 2009

Public Enemy #1? Subpar Movies

Plot overview: The Feds try to take down notorious American gangsters John Dillinger, Baby Face Nelson and Pretty Boy Floyd during a booming crime wave in the 1930s.

My bubble of positive expectations had been inflating since I discovered this movie was in production some 11 or so months ago. As the hype built and people around me had been giving me positive feedback, I struggled with my patience.


Public Enemies fits its name quite conveniently when considering the attention span of your average movie-goer. The lack of interest I held during this movie left me as quite the fidgety fucker from beginning to end.

You can only imagine my disappointment when I was blindsided with the mediocrity of this film from the very first scene. The color palette, however befitting, was dull and uninspiring; and the camera work was reminiscent to the capabilities of a digital camera. The actors were out of focus, the angles were unprofessional, and the herky-jerky motions felt a bit too much like The Blair Witch Project.

As the film progressed, the only thing keeping it from turning into a dull History Channel special was the complete disrespect for facts and time lines. After doing some research, I was surprised to find that the "Based on a true story" film was far from realistic, and was more of a mash-up of almost-events surrounding John Dillinger's life. In all honesty, Michael Mann could've renamed the characters, changed locations, and no one would be able to distinguish the story as having to do with Dillinger's life at all.

At no point in the film was I engaged or drawn into the story. I'm still confused about how Mann pulled off creating a movie that evoked no emotion. In retrospect, it unsettlingly felt like movie purgatory.

Overall, this movie was more like a scrapbook than anything else. It copy and pasted scenes, one after another, with little to no fluidity. The performances were unmemorable, and the cinematography average. It was very cold, very matter-of-fact (ironically despite it being anything but).

I'm saddened and a bit reluctant to say: if you're going to invest money in two and half hours of movie entertainment, you'd be better off sitting through Transformers 2.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Transformers 2 (1/5, to be generous) was a better film than Public Enemies, I'm saying it was more entertaining. I'd rather sit through two and a half hours of Megan Fox being a sexy, scowling bitch and watching shit blow up than spending the same time watching Michael Mann fail miserably with what should've been a compelling story and two of Hollywood's current elite actors.

2/5.

3 comments:

  1. A bit harsh. Pointing out some enjoyable things about the movie would probably make this seem more credible. Don't get me wrong though, I wasn't a fan either, but Transformers 2? That's just unrealistic. Public Enemies didn't have robot heaven. Haha. Good writing nonetheless.

    -The Ben Oliver

    ReplyDelete
  2. Transformers 2? I beg to differ. Having not seen Public Enenmy yet, I should wait to offer my opinion. However, I find it difficult to believe that anything could be worse the Transformers 2!

    ReplyDelete
  3. You guys are both getting it wrong..

    I'm not saying Transformers 2 (1/5, to be generous) was a better film than Public Enemies, I'm saying it was more entertaining. I'd rather sit through two and a half hours of Megan FOx being a sexy, scowling bitch and watching shit blow up than spending the same time watching Michael Mann fail miserably with what should've been a compelling story and two of Hollywood's current elite actors.

    I appreciate the comments none-the-less though.

    ReplyDelete