Johnny Depp gets dangerous again – ‘Public Enemies’ Review…

Posted on July 3, 2009 - 5:07pm by michael Michael Mann’s new crime film features several famous outlaws of the 1930s, but it is centered entirely around the central figure, John Dillinger (Johnny Depp), who the movie glorifies without pretending that he was at all a good guy. He was wildly popular with people, but in the same way that Mickey and Mallory were popular. He made headlines and people are still talking about him 80 years later, but he was still a violent criminal. We meet Dillinger as he is being roughly escorted back to prison eight weeks after having escaped. Despite having made that escape after serving nine years, the guards seem to have forgotten his name, but Dillinger is unconcerned. He doesn’t plan to stay long. He escapes with a few buddies and embarks on the bank-robbing spree that makes up much of the movie, all the while pursued by a crack detective named Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale), who in turn is vigorously urged along by none other than J. Edgar Hoover (an outstanding performance from Billy Crudup), who is concerned for his reputation as a major figure in law enforcement who has himself never arrested a single person. Dillinger regularly makes the police look ridiculous and incompetent, to the public’s delight. Purvis and Hoover tend to be unamused. One of the movie’s biggest successes, aside from an amazing re-creation of the time period, is the presentation of Dillinger not as an independent and heroic outlaw, but as an impulsive criminal who never thinks beyond a day or two in the future and seems to live not for money (although the members of his gang are really into that) but for the thrill of the crime itself. His sudden and intense romantic interest in Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard) is the only thing throughout the entire movie that really humanizes him. Watch the tiny, almost imperceptible smile he betrays when he gives her a fur coat, and how quickly and completely that smile disappears, and you get a pretty good idea of who he is. It’s actually a pretty remarkable bit of acting, that one shot. You can see right into his mind. But theirs is not a romantic relationship. Everything that he really knows about adult life he learned in prison, so he sees her from an intensely masculine perspective. Not in a sexual way, but in a more primitive way. He wants to protect her and keep her safe, but when he goes to see her at work one day, he shows that he also sees her as not far from a piece of his property. He wants her happy and safe, but he owns her.  Overall the movie is a battle between Dillinger, his gang, and Billie, and the entire law enforcement infrastructure. Dillinger is Public Enemy #1 (a term that I really think should be brought back), and we see in great detail what goes on behind the scenes as the police and FBI pursue him and how he evades pursuit. And the way that he evades pursuit, just so you know, is the reason that a movie is able to be made about his life. There is a scene in the movie that is supposed to have happened in real life where Dillinger walks into the “Dillinger Bureau” of the Chicago Police Department and strolls around the office, looking at the various newspaper clippings and progress reports tacked up on corkboards. He even walks up to a group of officers listening to the game on the radio and asks them the score. This last bit strikes me as the part that has been dramatized for effect, but I am willing to bet that Dillinger really did walk into the police station like that. I hope he did. Why do I hope he did? Because it would be cool as hell, that’s why!  This is the other interesting topic of debate about the movie. It totally glorifies the life of crime that Dillinger led, but it never pretends that he was anything but a hardened criminal. He had a total disregard for the law which he saw as his escape from the chains of everyday society. [caption id="attachment_42707" align="alignright" width="270" caption="And just in case their initials aren't enough, look at this resemblance!"][/caption] As long as he took whatever he wanted, he could go wherever he wanted to go and do whatever he wanted to do. If nothing else, you have to admire his simplicity. The movie has outstanding performances throughout and I understand is impeccably researched. It is structurally unique because it adheres to the facts of history and makes very little effort to put a Hollywood gloss on anything, which is a relief. The only real gripe I had with the movie are some unexpected and unnecessary digital effects near the end of the film, but as a straight-forward depiction of the life of one of America’s great criminals, you could hardly ask for more. The Bean Meter [caption id="attachment_42704" align="aligncenter" width="300" caption="4 Beans out of 5."][/caption]