"Public Enemies" could very well be the best bank robber biopic since "Bonnie and Clyde" and may be even better

Rating: 10/10 (29 November 2010)

Let's use our imaginations for a moment. Create an alternative reality universe in your mind, something I think all of us do whenever something does not go according to plan or to preference. Like the Academy Awards for 2009. I was completely dissatisfied with that list for one fundamental reason. If I could have changed that list, I would have removed "District 9" in the Best Picture category and substituted for it, Michael Mann's marvelous "Public Enemies." Not only that, but I would have given it the Award itself. I have not seen "The Hurt Locker" yet (I hope to soon, because I'm told it's very, very good) but I do sincerely think "Public Enemies" was the best film that I saw last year. And yes, I saw "Avatar" too.
"Public Enemies" is a mostly accurate screen transition of the story of John Dillinger, the notorious bank robber who rose to the top of the F.B.I.'s most wanted list during the 1930s. He is played by Johnny Depp (in one of the actor's finest performances) as a cynical, clear-headed man with no other desire than to push for what he wants. Yet, as we discover, he's still just a human being, when he falls in love with Billie Freschette (Marion Cotillard) and takes her on his gun-blazing, bank-heisting journey. Meanwhile, of course, there is a government agent, Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale, one of his best performances as well) determined to hunt Dillinger down by all means necessary. Not exactly an original setup, but with any great film, it is how director Michael Mann and his cast and crew execute the project that makes it work so well.
"Public Enemies" may very well be the best bank robber biopic since "Bonnie and Clyde" and maybe even better. Even though it has a sort of obligatory setup with ostensibly standard characters (a bank robber, his moll, and a government agent) it is done with such energy and such raw power that it nevertheless absorbed me right from the beginning. Watching "Public Enemies" I felt very much like I was one of the people in the holdup banks: unable to take my eyes or strict attention away for just the slightest second.
One of the things I admired most about the movie was the way it handled its characters. Turning what could have been stick figures into fleshed-out, three-dimensional human beings. For example, Dillinger is not a hardheaded killer impervious to emotions. There are parts to him that are more than subhuman, if just barely. He is devoted to those around him, and most of all to Billie and their story is really one of the more touching romantic subplots that I've seen in a movie for a long time. The reason? Because watching them together, I really got the sense that they were in love. Whereas other movies throw these in obligatory and without any passion, I did not see an actor and an actress going through the motions of rehearsed dialogue, but two people who loved and cared about each other and were willing to put themselves on the line for each other. And also, I like how the government agent, Melvin Purvis, does not turn out to be either a sheer genius or a bumbling fool. He's a conflicted, troubled individual himself. And I also like how the movie touches on the subjects of partnerships being torn apart (e.g. mobs splitting from the robbers). In addition, there's a particular FBI agent played by Stephen Lang who, although important, is not rushed into taking up one of the leading roles. Somehow, by suppressing his screen time, it makes his important moments in the film so much more powerful. It's like a documentary.
Mr. Mann is a very talented director. He knows how to shoot a movie well. The action sequences in "Public Enemies," in particular, are tense and exciting and they go on to great lengths without wearing out. This is not the Hollywood fantasy land where the protagonist scores a direct hit every time he shoots but the band guys can empty machine gun magazines in the direction of their target and never come close. There's one scene in particular, which stretches on to great lengths because it acknowledges these realistic scenarios, and it's utterly gripping. But also Mr. Mann knows how to coordinate his actors and his camera, taking note of what he has to and excising what he does not.
But perhaps the best stronghold are the performance. As I mentioned before, this is one of the best performances that Mr. Depp has ever given. Oliver Stone was right when he guessed the young actor he cast in a bit role in "Platoon" would one day become a big star. Mr. Bale redeemed himself in this film from his lackluster, drained performance in "Terminator Salvation" and proved once again what a talented actor he is. Ms Cotillard is certainly a beautiful-looking woman, but she's also a professional who excels at communicating passion. She's more than just part of the scenery and her denouement is one of the most haunting, yet beautiful images in recent movie history. Bit parts are played by Stephen Lang, Billy Crudup, Stephen Dorff, and Stephen Graham (a lot of Stephens in this cast, eh?).
Is there anything I don't like about this movie? Well, I am not particularly moved by the digital photography of the picture, but that's a minor detractor. As Bosley Crowther said, movies should be assessed on their "dramatic architecture, not the hocus-pocus of the eye." And the dramatic architecture here is excellent. Unfortunately, the Academy Awards (and many people, I'm shocked to see) did not think so. Rex Reed and I seem to be virtually alone on this one.