Michael Mann plays with the gangster genre and HD technology with mixed results

Rating: Null/10 (7 July 2009)

"Public Enemies", Michael Mann's account of John Dillinger's (Johnny Depp) crime wave and his romantic involvement with a young beauty (Marion Cotillard), has technical pros (the film vs. digital video controversy is a matter of personal taste, in my opinion, but that deserves to be discussed), but lacks character development.
Shot in HD (high definition video), with some interesting hand-held camera movements and unorthodox angles, the movie shows how HD video has developed. Take a look at last year's magnificent "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button", one of the most visually stunning films I've ever seen, which was shot on video as well. Sometimes, it's hard to tell the difference. Some people argue that video should only be employed for independent, low budget films, and its use in big budget productions like this just for the sake of stylization is unwelcome. Naturally, the cameras and general equipment used in a production like "Public Enemies" are much more advanced than the ones used in, say, "Frozen River". However, lots of people think the video look doesn't fit a gangster flick. Film has that special look that video doesn't have, and film still produces the most beautiful images you can see on a big screen. Digital, however, has a special texture to itself as well, and whether it works for this or that genre is just a matter of personal taste. I wasn't turned off by the use of HD in "Public Enemies" and actually think it gave the movie an interesting, unusual look – you could see the pores, wrinkles on Depp's and Christian Bale's faces like never before.
My main problem with the film is the lack of character development and, why not say, soul to the whole package (So let me end the technical discussion here). By character development, I don't necessarily mean to give a longer background story to the main characters; however, the relationship between Dillinger and his girlfriend seems cold and contrived. Depp is charismatic, and Cotillard, who delivered one of my favourite screen performances of all time in "La Vie en Rose" (and earned an Oscar for it), isn't bad, but is not given much to do (and unlike the likes of a Juliette Binoche, she doesn't sound very convincing in English yet; she seems much more comfortable in her own language, which doesn't mean I'm bashing her efforts because I believe she will have a wonderful international career, and I'm looking forward to seeing her with Daniel Day-Lewis in the musical "Nine" later this year). They lack chemistry, and while the movie spends more time on Dillinger's escapades from the law, it never finds a balance with the "love story"; and long, choreographed killings get old after a while – especially when you don't care that much for any of the characters. The movie lacks tension and believability on both sides. It doesn't always work as a gangster film, and the love story at the core doesn't ring true.
I think it was Billy Wilder who once said "Nobody is gonna remember after a movie: what a great shot! What about the story?" Unfortunately, nowadays, Hollywood movies (and some supposedly artsy indie films, too) rely way too much on unusual camera angles and forget about telling a story. And these experiments and "cool shots" turn out to be the only things people remember as specific to such movies. Being experimental is fine, but sometimes when you try too hard you lose every and any focus. Mann succeeded with his digital experiments in the great "Collateral" (2004), failed miserably with the dreadful "Miami Vice" (2006), and had mixed results with this "Public Enemies". This is NO "Bonnie and Clyde", and as cool as Mann's camera angles and visual approach can be, they're not half as groundbreaking as Dede Allen's daring editing job in Arthur Penn's masterpiece (back in 1967, and still as compelling over four decades later).
The way it is, "Public Enemies" has good moments and technical achievements, but seems more like a curious exercise in style than a really good movie.
6.5/10.