The LA Times’ last man standing, Kenneth Turan gives major props to Michael Mann’s Public Enemies, but particularly in the way it looks:
Simultaneously an art film and a crime film, Mann’s latest work (he shares screenplay credit with Ronan Bennett and Ann Biderman) may not give you a ton to hang on to emotionally, but the beauty and skill of the filmmaking keep you tightly in its grasp.
Manohla Dargis, though, calls it pure cinematic art:
Michael Mann’s “Public Enemies” is a grave and beautiful work of art. Shot in high-definition digital by a filmmaker who’s helping change the way movies look, it revisits with meticulous detail and convulsions of violence a short, frantic period in the life and bank-robbing times of John Dillinger, an Indiana farm boy turned Depression outlaw, played by a low-voltage Johnny Depp. Much of what makes the movie pleasurable is the vigor with which it restages our familiar romance with period criminals, a perennial affair. But what also makes it more than the sum of its spectacular shootouts is the ambivalence about this romance that seeps into the filmmaking, steadily darkening the skies and draining the story of easy thrills.
I’m still on the fence as to whether it’s a Best Pic contender or not. But I figure with ten slots, it has a much better chance than it would have otherwise.
35 Responses for "Turan, Dargis on Public Enemies"
“But I figure with ten slots, it has a much better chance than it would have otherwise.”
As much of a technical perfectionist as is Michael Mann, 8-10 nominations wouldn’t surprise me.
But I’ll only say that in the comments until I see for myself tomorrow afternoon.
Scott Foundas, Manohla Dargis, Kenny Turan and Jeff Wells are all SPOT-ON. This is a narrow, minimalist, straightforward art film that’s stunningly shot to the point of being a legitimate genre-defining picture. It’s not a broad, warm, spoonfed action pic and a lot of people will and have been left out in the cold.
Anybody that complains that the Dillinger myth isn’t uncovered and that there isn’t enough social and political context and that somehow the films is lacking dramatic and emotional weight needs to fork over their credentials on the spot.
It has a 57 on RT and 70 on metacritic. I ‘m thinking its going to hover around those two numbers.
I see that PE has made it onto the Oscar tracker in several categories. Nice to see Marion Cotillard up there for supporting actress but I’m surprised that Depp hasn’t been added under best actor.
An okay film.. 7/10… letter grade: B
read my review here… http://www.tlands.blogspot.com
I gotta admit, the French Oscar woman winner had a great scene after the cop beats the shit out of her. It could squeeze in a nod for her?
As I wrote below, Johnny Depp and Cotilllard should make another movie together. They have great romantic chemistry. And Depp should go back to those bad boy romantic roles. It fits him very well.
At times it felt like a docudrama and I expected a voice over to come on, and I agree it’s a good movie, not a great movie. B/B+. And does anybody film a shootout better than Michael Mann?
interestingly, Turan’s review isn’t linked or seemingly counted in the metacritic scoring. Might boost it a bit higher than the current score of 69.
I wonder if the Wednesday release date has some critics going uncounted, too, HaroldsMaude. Normally the number of reviews for a wide release in thousands of theaters is 32-35. Metacritic hasn’t added any more since the 25 they had last night. I think Turan’s review came in late last night too, because it’s actually dated July 1.
Another interesting (and aggravating) thing going on at RT. Stephanie Zacharek and Scott Foundas have reviews rated at 80 and 90 on metacritic, but as of right now, those two reviews are linked on RT — but have a N/R score — so their postitive impressions are not being counted in RT’s strangely low averages. Either the RT staff hasn’t had a chance to read and evaluate them yet, or they don’t know what to make of them. (I wouldn’t be surprised to see RT misinterpret Zacharek’s review as “rotten.” I’ve said for a long time that I think there are some serious reading comprehension problems at RT.)
Finally, remember how we noticed yesterday that David Denby’s New Yorker review got a “rotten” tomato on RT, but was scored with an 80 on metacritic? Somebody apparently made a phone call, because Denby’s review has been downgraded to a 60 on metacritic today.
So many critics having been using the “coulda been great, coulda been a contender” phrasing, that I think RT is thinking “not a masterpiece” means “no good.”
I’ve never been a fan of RT’s black-and-white, all-or-nothing method of rating reviews. It lacks any grasp of nuance.
UPDATE: What did I just say about the likelihood that RT would totally misinterpret Stephanie Zacharek’s review? In the time it took me to write that, the RT rating for the Salon review went from N/R to rotten. The same review that metacritic interprets as an 80.
This happens time and time again on RT. I know they have an enormous amount of stuff to sift through over there, but some of those guys simply can’t read. Sorry to be blunt, but they don’t read, they skim. And skim poorly. It’s bugged me for years.
RT still seems to be popular, but given the problems with skimming and misinterpretation and the diversity and (I’ll say it again) riff raff of reviews included in the calculation, I prefer to go with metacritic for my quick guide to a film and to locate specific reviewers. (Plus, I like the simplicity of the website and the ability to also read music and TV reviews in the same place.)
UPDATE: Turan’s review is posted (29 reviews total), and the metacritic score for PE is now 71.
whew! well barring any last-minute grenades like a 0 or 20 or 40 score (which some oscar nominees have received) then Public Enemies is safely in the, er, Green Zone. Anything hovering around 70 is good to go for Best Picture consideration. Ray (73), Babel (69), Seabiscuit (72), Erin Brockovich (73), and the notorious 58 for The Reader. And those were years with only 5 nominees.
Impeccable production values and across the board prestige still count for a lot with the Academy, and rightly so, I think.
Public Enemies has two things going for it. No reviews lower than 50 means nobody utterly despised it, and won’t try to bring it down. And it has some very important and influential supporters — Dargis, Turan, Ebert — as well as a two solid perfect scores of 100.
I’ll see for myself in about an hour. (Who knows, I might hate it.)
I thought it was a pretty good film. Johnny Depp couldn’t be better and I agree, his chemistry with Marion Cotillard is remarkable. They should definitley do another film together. Wasn’t that thrilled about the documentary feel, but I’ll get over it. Critics are being harsh imo.
Best movie i’ve seen this year. Simply beautiful…
There doesn’t really seem to be any sense that Johnny’s performance is remarkable enough (or remarked on enough) to sustain him through to any awards. Am I wrong?
Hadn’t it been assumed that it was going to be his to lose?
If it’s a monster hit he may still be nominated, but can we seriously believe there won’t be stronger, more critically acclaimed work by the end of the year to derail his chances of finally getting the oscar this year?
I think Marion could get a supporting nod. She’s very good. Her look is so fascinating, those deep deep eyes and that jailhouse scene at the end when the detective gives her his last words. Priceless.
Sasha cleverly has Cotillard installed on the Contender Tracker already, Sally. Marion made the movie for me.
“Marion made the movie for me.”
Really? Was she great?
I hope so!
Sally, I agree with you on Cotillard and the shootouts. The latter were really breathtaking. Hell, the former was really breathtaking. Forgive me, but she is beautiful, isn’t she? And her chemistry with Depp is palpable. It did make me wish for more scenes between them, but that kind of works in favor of the story’s arc — that audience investment in their relationship.
[And look at you quoting Billy Crudup. ; )]
Alison Flynn — my guess is that Sasha’s taking into consideration the potential of future contenders. Best Actor is always an overloaded category (hmm, wonder why?) and PE’s summer release and Depp’s acute performance may not be showy enough to contend throughout the year. But I say this: kudos to him for playing that role smartly and not showboating or caricaturing. He’s a brilliant actor and knows when to reel it in and play it authentically. His performance served the film very well. Everyone was clearly on the same page, which is so nice to see, isn’t it?
I hated the way it looked and it pretty much ruined the movie for me. I couldn’t get past the shaking. I think if he’d used static cameras it would have been a much better movie, for me anyway. People who don’t have a problem with the camera shake may have had a completely different film experience from me. After a while it seems to steady a bit, or I got used to it, and then I enjoyed it much better but that was already half-way through. You can’t like a movie for just half, right?
I saw it last night and I gotta admit it was MUCH better then I had anticipated. I actually loved the fact that it really was just manhunt film – or should I say MANNhunt film. Don’t think it has a shot at a lot of the main Oscars (though with ten nominees who knows), but in terms of just fun, summer movie entertainment done well, I was a big fan.
With 10 slots open, it’s a big possibility. However, does anybody agree w/ me that they change the poster to feature Marion Cotillard — to get the women in the audience?
And I agree w/ Jon, if you enjoy manhunt type movies, this is the one. I enjoyed it too, will have to see it again to give it a higher rating than “good”, just short of great.
(sort of like the Fugitive, now that I think about it)
Solid movie, probably my favorite of Mann’s since The Insider. Depp, Cotillard, art design, costume design, score and cinematography all deserve oscar consideration. The sound design was pretty horrible though. I understand what they were trying to do with it, but they got a little too cute for my taste.
Also was I the only one who thought Stephen Lang did the most with the least in that movie? Found his portrayal of Winstead far more affecting than Bale’s characterization of Purvis. If he had been given more, I’d throw him out there as a deserving of consideration for Supporting Actor.
Can I also mention that Jason Clarke (the tall member of Depp’s gang) eerily resembles Michael Mann? I actually thought for a minute that he was Mann’s son or brother.
Michael Mann really is a remarkable director. I would say he is underrated but the truth is he isn’t. His movies – especially MANHUNTER and HEAT – have become classics and more appreciated since their initial release.
Definitely enjoyed this.
I liked this movie but i think i was expecting more. With 10 slots open for best picture it may get a nomination.
Johnny Depp was himmmm …Johnny Depp. He was good but not better than some of his previous roles. He may get nomination because he is Johnny Depp.
I agree with some other comments above. Marion was the best thing about this movie for me. She was very pretty. But she was very good too even though she has a small part. I believe she deserves a nod. I also agree she and Johnny have good chemistry. I’d like to see them together in another movie.
By the way I do not expect this movie to be a box office hit!
I can’t wait to see this!
I know I´m terribly late on this and noone will read this cause it´s old news, but anyway, since I saw “Public Enemies” yesterday I just feel the need to state that it was much better than I expected.
I really liked it, especially the look of it, the great cinematography, art direction, costume design, it all perfectly evoked the 40s gangster movies – great!
And I want to support what Ryan said: Marion Cotillard gives a wonderful performance, to me the best of the movie!
When the dust settles at the official end of summer, Dominik, I want to go back and take another look at a few of the movies that were under-appreciated when we were too close to them. Public Enemies is still one of my favorite films of the year, and it deserves some effort to try to make sure it’s not forgotten.
Any film starring Johnny Depp will not be forgotten.
@ Ryan and Kay: I am also a huge Johnny Depp-fan, but I like him much better in his “serious” movies and I´m very happy he is switching from his more comical disney roles to some serious character studies from time to time!
“Public Enemies” is one of the few movies I am already sure I will buy the DVD. I wouldn´t call it a masterpiece, but from time to time you find movies that offer some qualities like a remarkable cinematography or the whole dazzling design that are remarkable and worth watching it again and again!
Up and Public Enemies are the only two movies I paid to see twice this year. The thought of the blu-ray makes me tingle and feel all funny down there.
Totally agree with you about the production design, Dominik. I love how it was meticulous without feeling like a museum exhibit. Instead it was fully inhabited, lived in.
I was going to re-feature it when it crossed $100 mil, but looks like $98 mil could be the best we can expect for several weeks. $175 worldwide. DVD and BR should hit in December, just in time to stuff stockings.
Up hasn´t opened yet but I am ready to see it!
I´m excited to see “Inglorious Basterds” on sunday. The critics in germany are very positive, not only for Waltz, but for the directional merit of Tarantino. Many called it the best since “Pulp Fiction”!
Many called it the best since “Pulp Fiction”!
I think that’s going to be the consensus opinion that sticks, Dominik.
(sorry to bug out on you now, but need to get a few more hours sleep before the trailer invasions in the morning.)
OK, good night!
I wondered if you guys (you and Sasha) ever get any sleep. I mean, here in Germany it´s noon, but for you it´s middle of the night!
Leave a reply