Public Enemies

A couple of months ago, after re-watching Michael Mann's 1995 film Heat on DVD, I realised that it's the last 25 minutes or so of that film that lifts it from the merely great to truly excellent. Up to that point, it's an enjoyably slick, fast-paced and expertly executed action crime thriller; past that point, the dramatic focus sharpens (and moves beyond the usual action-film registers of guns and male bravado) to narrow in on just the main characters and the pivotal choices they make in re-assessing who they are, what they love and live for, and what they will and will not sacrifice. Alas, there are no such dramatic revelations or gravitas in Mann's latest film, Public Enemies, and it's annoyingly unsatisfying as a result.

Interestingly, there's more than a few parallels between Public Enemies and Heat, and Mann fans could while away an hour or two checking them all off. Chief among the similarities, though, is that both are based on the lives of real Chicago-based criminals. Public Enemies takes us back to the (first) Great Depression, circa 1933, to firstly show us John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) and trusty partner Red Hamilton (Jason Clarke) breaking some of their gang out of the Indiana State Prison (among them, surprisingly, David Wenham). From there the gang make their way to Chicago and start robbing banks in fast, clean and ruthless raids. Along the way Dillinger meets and falls in love with waitress Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard), and half charms/half claims her as his own with his upfront offer of a relationship. When he turns up at Billie's workplace to take her away, he violently disposes of an interrupting hotel guest while she protests that she knows nothing about him. "I like baseball, movies, good clothes, fast cars, whiskey, and you... what else you need to know?" he replies, holding out his hand.

Dillinger is a man without a code and without a vision - he has an outlook and an operandi: live well and take while you can. He answers Billie's worries about him getting caught with a curt: "They ain't tough enough, smart enough or fast enough. I can hit any bank I want, any time. They got to be at every bank, all the time." Dillinger's lightning-fast bank jobs bring him to the attention of J. Edgar Hoover (Billy Crudup), busy trying to expand his crime fighting bureau into a nation-wide police agency (which will become the FBI). Hoover declares a "war on crime" and pulls in Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale) to hunt down Dillinger, his gang, and other criminal associates (namely Baby Face Nelson).

So, we have a stellar cast, a seasoned director capable of greatness, and a solid storyline punctuated with the idiosyncrasies of real-life crime (Dillinger really did once walk in off the street and wander around a state police department when he was a wanted man). What's not to love? Well, connecting emotionally to either Dillinger or Purvis is, as I've mentioned, difficult: there's not much emotion on display to relate to. This is not a performance issue: Depp carries the film easily and gives the role depth, nuance and character. Also particularly good is Jason Clarke as Dillinger's loyal partner John "Red" Hamilton. Christian Bale is solid, but as the stoic Purvis, committed only to bringing Dillinger in, he's required to show even less emotional range.

Of prime concern to the film is the presentation of a seemingly accurate and complete record of the final years of Dillinger's career and life: the film overflows with details of locations and peripheral characters that otherwise come and go. But in presenting such a studied, detailed account, it goes no further; no deeper. The film's other main stylistic hallmark is to shoot its carefully constructed milieu in a loose, handheld style - which takes some getting used to, and I assume is an attempt to bridge the time gap and make the events on screen appear to unfold presently, as a lived experience rather than a past history.

The result is not a total success; in part, because Mann shoots this film (like his other recent efforts) on High Definition Video, which probably I hope looks stunning in a digital cinema projection system, but on the transfer-to-film print that I saw, gives patchy results. Sometimes it looks great, sometimes (especially in low lit scenes) the image is grainy and detail is lost in its poor contrast range. In terms of style, then, Clint Eastwood's recent The Changeling gives us a more engaging recreation of a similar setting and era (though Public Enemies is otherwise poles apart in terms of narrative structure and characterisation).

So, yes, I am damning Public Enemies with faint praise. I liked it, but I wanted to love it. The level of craftsmanship and talent on display here is impressive, but not beguiling.