Mediocre. Michael Mann ruins an otherwise interesting story.

Rating: 4/10 (11 October 2010)

Only Michael Mann can make a bad guy like Dillinger seem far less bad than the FBI. Seriously - the FBI finally picks up Dillingers girlfriend and what do they do? Slap her around, hit her with a sack, and force her to pee on herself. Nice job, dipstick. It's a miracle you work in Hollywood. Depp does a good job making Dillinger interesting - even if it is a hammed up, poorly scripted character. Hey Michael Mann - you could have made this movie great by actually making it about Dillinger. Instead, you made this movie about a boring guy claiming to be Dillinger, a love story that, frankly, falls flat, and a political commentary on "torture". Here's a newsflash for you Mann - no one cares what you think. We wanted to see a movie about a wildly popular, fascinating John Dillinger: a man who, despite being a murderer and bank robber, managed to capture the publics attention as a bit of a hero. Why ruin all that history? Why turn Dillinger from interesting to lame? Why show "torture" (especially stupid torture that, in all likelihood, never happened - because it was unnecessary)? Why tell the story in so much of a hurry? The gun battles were boring, the chase scenes were boring, and the love story was boring. Michael Mann's legacy is just that: boring. I'm so glad I didn't pay to see this (caught it on cable). I'm already upset at how much of my life was wasted by watching this stupid, poorly written, terribly directed film. I won't be checking out any more of Mann's "films". He's lost what made him interesting and become a hack. Thanks for proving you don't care about good film making anymore.