Heat, but better.

Rating: 8/10 (1 July 2009)

I think there is no doubt in most peoples minds that Heat was a fantastic film. No means perfect, but pretty darn close. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say Public Enemies is Heat, but better.
Acting was good on all parts from everyone. Matching, if not surpassing that of Heat. The realism was accurate to the last detail. I don't know what it was like being alive in 1933, but I sure believed I was there. At times, I even thought this was a documentary. The camera work was fantastic and definitely unique. I've heard many bash the use of digital, but it really isn't that noticeable after a short while. The angles, shots and cinematography was awe-inspiring. Character development was right on the money, although I'd like to have had more on Melvin Purvis. The amount of character development was a major thing that puts it above Heat in my opinion. I often found Heat concentrated more than necessarily on developing the characters, even in the late stages. A good half hour could've been cut from Heat by reducing the development of each character, without it affecting to the final product much. The music and general sound also put it above your average film. It was sparse on music, but when there was music, it was used extremely well in all the right places and situations. The effects of guns and footsteps, and especially atmospheres in a room full of people was spot on. I'm guessing Mann opted to record the sound of what was going on as it was being filmed and including as much of it as possible, which is usually frowned upon it seems, but it really creates a mood and atmosphere, really makes you feel like you're there.
However, although the relatively amateur techniques work, it does at times feel like an amateur movie. For this reason alone, I give it 9/10 rather than 10/10.