Public Enemies

In the age of the gangsters, the 1930s in Depression-era America, one name stands out above the rest. Sure, there's Pretty Boy Floyd, the Barkers, Baby Face Nelson, Machine Gun Kelly, Alvin Karpis, even Bonnie and Clyde. But the name John Dillinger stands out, Public Enemy No. 1, a gangster, bank robber and possible killer who rose to notoriety in the early 1930s. I reviewed this movie from 2009 that works as a quasi-biography, but rewatched it recently and updated the review. Here were go with 2009's Public Enemies.

It's 1933 in Crown Point, Indiana and John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) has been caught and is just being brought to prison, or so his guards think. Instead, the notorious bank robber has arranged a breakout, a group from his gang busting out with him. With his gang back together again, Dillinger goes on a spree, robbing banks all over Chicago and into Indiana and Wisconsin. The gangster feels the noose tighten around his neck, his notoriety forcing the government's hand in bringing him to justice. The Bureau of Investigation (the FBI) is in its infancy, J. Edgar Hoover (Billy Crudup) placing a young but capable agent, Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale), in charge of bringing Dillinger to justice. Using all the technology available to them, Purvis and his agents do everything they can to capture Dillinger, but can the notorious bank robber continue his crime spree?

This 2009 crime thriller is based off a book of the same name, Public Enemies, by author Bryan Burrough. It's a great read, non-fiction at its best. Burrough's book covers a ton of ground about one of the more violent, turbulent times in American history. The 1930s were the time of the gangster, killers, bank robbers and thieves working on a grand scale with a trail of fast cars, money and riches and dead bodies. Almost every single one of them died bloody and violent. It was a bloody, violent, fascinating time in American history. Originally thought of as a miniseries, Burroughs turned his research into a book. With so many people, places and incidents, the film version was condensed to John Dillinger vs. Melvin Purvis. It's a wise choice because Burroughs' novel as is would have been overwhelming.  

We meet other people, but this is Johnny Depp's movie as he brings John Dillinger to life. A sympathetic character? No, not quite. It is on the other hand a fascinating character to watch. The people who met him during his crime reign of terror, a lot of witnesses said he was charming, likable and friendly. One of the biggest movie stars around, Depp is the best thing going in this movie, making Dillinger a human being, not just a historical name. Depp's Dillinger seems to know the life he's chosen necessitates a live-fast, live-hard mentality. Knowledge of the historical facts or not, you just know Dillinger is leading a doomed life. Sooner or later, his luck will run out. It's really the only character here given any sort of development or characterization too, John given a love interest in Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard), a coat check girl from a poor background who falls hard for the gangster, as does he for her. Depp and Cotillard have a believable, real chemistry, giving the story that necessary human element.

Who best to direct a high-arcing crime thriller? How about a director with movies like Heat, Thief, Last of the Mohicans and The Inside to his name? Michael Mann takes the helm here for this style-heavy period piece.  'Enemies' was filmed on location in Chicago and around the Midwest where much of the story actually took place. Chicago serving as a backdrop for a story is never a bad thing, giving an air of authenticity here. The suits, the hats, the gentleman gangsters, the cars, it all adds up a to a more than worthy time capsule to 1930s Depression-era America. If there's a fault, Mann is too interested in the style, not the substance. He shot with a digital format, giving those scenes an odd, fuzzy look. The editing is fast and hard -- almost schizophrenic -- to the point the movement is hard to follow. Replace some of that aggressive style which doesn't necessarily work with some more story and characterization, and then we're talking.

Depp's movie, no doubt, but in star power, Christian Bale isn't far behind. It's just star power though. Bale is a really good actor, but he's given little to do here. The real-life Melvin Purvis was a bit of a dunce, the movie choosing not to delve too much into that angle. Bale is okay, but it's a necessary, workmanlike part, nothing more. Crudup does a good job with his quick scenes as Hoover, a glorified cameo. As for Dillinger's gang, look for Jason Clarke, Stephen Dorff, David Wenham and another violent gangster, Stephen Graham as maniacal Baby Face Nelson. Stephen Lang is memorable as a Texas lawman, Charles Winstead, brought in to help Purvis, Rory Cochrane playing one of his fellow Chicago FBI agents. There's also quick parts for Channing Tatum, Carey Mulligan and Giovanni Ribisi, and in the case of Tatum and Mulligan, don't blink or you'll miss them. There's plenty of other appearances that probably deserve some attention, but they're not around long enough to mention.

That's one of the weaknesses in Mann's film. Condensing Burroughs' book and doing so with just one focus -- Dillinger -- is still a daunting task. I think it tries to accomplish too much. A year-plus of story, countless speaking roles, and a whole lot of history. Depp is excellent, that's not in question. The action is very exciting, especially the infamous Little Bohemia shootout. Mann does action and does it well. The heavy, automatic machine guns, the B.A.R.s, the heavy pistols, these are guns that pack a punch so there's something visceral and adrenaline-pumping in the action scenes. Something is missing though. It's cool, but the movie doesn't have a ton of heart. The last 30 minutes are the movie at its best, Purvis and the FBI closing in on Dillinger. One what-if scene has Dillinger walking into the Dillinger Squad office, surreal and cool. The same for Dillinger's death, a stylish, cool scene aided by Elliot Goldenthal's musical score.

A good movie but with some serious flaws. It could have been a classic, and maybe with a miniseries it would have been. Still, Johnny Depp is cooler than you.

Public Enemies (2009): ** 1/2 /****
Rewrite of July 2009 review

Texas Killing Fields

I'm gonna be honest here. I was aware of this movie, even thought it looked pretty decent despite some middling reviews. I liked the cast and was curious what it would off. But then it sat there on Netflix glaring back at me for quite awhile. What changed my mind? I fell hard for HBO's True Detective -- still working my way through Season 1 -- and wanted to watch a gritty police procedural, hence our sitdown with 2011's Texas Killing Fields.

In Texas City, Texas, a darkness hangs in the air. Unsolved mysteries seem to plague the police department, dead bodies turning up far too often in the maze-like, trance-like bayous that surround the oil fields to the point the area is dubbed 'the Killing Fields.' Two detectives, Mike Souder (Sam Worthington) and Brian Heigh (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), are called in to investigate when a dead body turns up, a teenage girl who may have had ties with drugs and prostitution. A former NYC cop, Heigh is still adjusting to a different style, a different way of investigating while Souder grew up learning the system. The clues don't seem to lead anywhere and everywhere at the same time. Heigh begins to suspect they may be dealing with a serial killer, but can the two detectives put it all together? When they receive a call from the killer as he executes a victim, their motivations become amped up even more.

This movie should have been better. There, I said it. 'Fields' comes from director Ami Canaan Mann -- daughter of Michael Mann -- and certainly has a lot of potential. The story is loosely based on a true story of the murders of many women along a stretch of road in Texas along the I-45 corridor. I really liked the style, the darkness, the sense of doom that hangs in the air. Cinematographer Stuart Dryburgh films a story that is uncomfortable, dark and eerie, like evil is hanging in the air, composer Dickon Hinchliffe's score aiding the cause in creating that ever so dark mood. The bayous just have something dark about them, these expansive yet claustrophobic fields holding all sorts of doom and evil. It doesn't have much of a positive outlook on life, evil waiting to descend on all of us. Hard to beat that in a police procedural where the detectives are pushed to their absolute limits to find the murderer.

With some obvious dark drama, the variation here is on the buddy cop flick (hold the laughs of course). I'm a fan of both Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Sam Worthington so it was cool to see them paired up as two very different cops. Their differences, their dynamic works well. Morgan's Brian is the crusader, wanting to save everyone and anyone he can, becoming obsessed with the cases that cross his desk. Worthington's Mike similarly wants to solve each case, but he's also been worn down by the region he's worked in for so long. Murder is far from accepted, but there's also little surprise in this veteran cop when new bodies pop up. Their differing outlooks clash, their arguments fueling the case. Brian sees the potential that the newest victim is tied in with other unsolved murders. Mike simply wants to find the murderer as it impacts his jurisdiction. Two solid if unspectacular performances.

Because the case drama isn't enough, we need some personal drama. Mike's ex-wife and a detective from the state police is played by Jessica Chastain in a wasted part, the drama never really clicking. Chloe Grace Moretz is good as little Anne, a teenage girl who Brian keeps helping because her mother works as a prostitute at home. Jason Clarke, Stephen Graham, James Hebert and Jon Eyez play possible suspects in the case.

So style to burn, stock characters who are still interesting, what's missing? Simply put...the story. It's so convoluted that nothing ever clicks together. There's the one victim, then there's others, then there are others that may have been from other murderers. Who are we looking for? Are the killers those ones or these ones? Sure, I'm convinced that's what actual police and detective work is really like. Leads that don't go anywhere, leads and clues that are misleading, suspects who can't be convicted. It's all there. But in a 105-minute movie why pack all this in there? I was never quite sure what was going on, a huge red herring going absolutely nowhere. Realistic? Most likely. Good for the sake of the story? Nope. A disappointing end result.

Texas Killing Fields (2011): **/****

London Boulevard

A screenplay writer with movies like The Departed (where he won an Oscar), Kingdom of Heaven, Body of Lies, and Edge of Darkness, William Monahan has certainly built up a lot of credibility and respect for himself over the last six years. The writer has made the jump to a more involved role in the movie-making process, taking over the director's chair for 2010's London Boulevard.

Fresh out of prison after serving a three-year sentence, Mitchel (Colin Farrell) is readjusting to life and looking for work. He's not positive of what he wants from his new lease on life, but he certainly knows what he doesn't want. Mitchel wants to leave being a low-level hood, a gangster, behind, but it won't be so easy. He takes a job being a bodyguard, almost a consultant, for a recluse actress/model, Charlotte (Keira Knightley), who lives in a forted-up London house avoiding the paparazzi. It still isn't quite what he'd want, but he gets along with Charlotte and sees where it goes. Unfortunately, it won't be that easy. His old kind-of friend, Billy (Ben Chaplin), has a meeting set up with Gant (Ray Winstone), an unhinged gangster who wants Mitchel to work for him. What will Mitchel do?

Two movies came to mind as I watched this 2010 British crime drama; the original Get Carter starring Michael Caine and the more recent Layer Cake starring Daniel Craig. In terms of both style, story and character development, 'Boulevard' clearly is a movie influenced by its predecessors. In fact, that's why so many viewers seemed to intensely dislike this movie. They claim it borrows too much from previous crime dramas, and leaves itself without an ounce of originality. To a point, I think it is a fair criticism. It does borrow somewhat liberally from other stories/films, but it still manages to carve out its own niches. Monahan must have been influenced by working with Martin Scorsese because his soundtrack is very British retro-rock oriented, featuring everything from the Yardbirds (listen to Heart Full of Soul) to the more recent Kasabian, including a great use of The Green Fairy. Not groundbreaking in terms of style or story, but unique enough.

Much like both Get Carter and Layer Cake, I wasn't quite sure where 'Boulevard' was heading. Well, that's not true. You can predict the ending early, but the route getting there is a long and winding road. It's always enjoyable/interesting, but it does drift a bit at times. With as many characters as we meet, it serves as a who's who of the London criminal underworld. Lots of nasty, sleazy individuals, all looking out for themselves because with the snap of a finger, it could be lights out for them. There were times it reminded me of a western landscape (right down to composer Sergio Pizzorno's score, who's also an occasional lead for Kasabian), even reflecting a spaghetti western at times. Yes, I can bring everything back to the spaghetti western. So while the story may not be the most pointed, direct one, it is nonetheless a fun ride.

That can be attributed to star Colin Farrell who's long been one of my favorites. He's capable of playing a variety of roles, but here as the dark, capable and intense Mitchel, he's at his absolute best. This is a man simmering with intensity. He wants to be left alone, and given a clean slate in life intends to live up to it. Maybe more than anything, Farrell looks the part. His Mitchel has been burned in the past and answers to no one. He looks out for those around him -- at his own expense and pain -- because they can't do it themselves. It's a doomed, tragic character if there ever was one, a man trying to put his past behind him. Through Knightley's Charlotte, he can see that fresh start. Charlotte is as equally damaged as him, but they're a good fit together. Mitchel is that iconic crime figure; the bad guy, the anti-hero who we still root for knowing it can't end well for him or his hopes.

Weaving through the London criminal underworld, Monahan clearly saw the potential for a long list of characters with great potential, starting obviously with Farrell and Knightley. Winstone is an ideal villain as Gant, a gay gangster who always seems a word or two from snapping and ripping your head off quite literally. David Thewlis is a scene-stealer as Jordan, Charlotte's handler/friend/assistant, who gets along with Mitchel in all his weirdness despite being stoned/blitzed/high at all times. Chaplin is the slimy past associate, the lowest level of gangsters with Anna Friel playing Briony, Mitchel's slutty sister who he constantly has to save from herself. Also look for Eddie Marsan, Stephen Graham, Alan Williams and Sanjeev Bhaskar in key supporting roles.   

Maybe because the story and characters were more than a little familiar, I enjoyed this movie quite a bit. I'm a sucker for British crime drama/thrillers, and when they're handled correctly they can be a lot of fun (even considering a lack of originality). This is a dark, stylish crime story that is good, not great. It has style to burn. A shot of Farrell's Mitchel driving through London at night in a classic car, the Yardbirds playing as a soundtrack, it's just an effortless cool, a style that many films attain to be but never quite get there. Watch the scene HERE. Highly recommend this one. The trailer below is misleading. This is not a happy-go-lucky, quirky comedy about an ex-con, although it does have its incredibly dark humorous moments.

London Boulevard <---trailer (2010): *** 1/2 /****