http://www.newsguide.us/art-entertainment/movies/

http://www.newsguide.us/art-entertainment/movies/

http://www.newsguide.us/art-entertainment/movies/

Neither do I think the cinematographer did a bad job at all. Spinotti has a pretty impressive resume, including two Oscar noms.

On the other hand, it is a slow movie, and it is very definitely working a specific theory. As I implied, it's very much Manhunter, and very much not Silence of the Lambs. That's not going to work for a lot of people.

On the next other hand, I disagree that there was no character development, or that the viewer is expected to know much about who is who beforehand. It seemed to me that it delivered a lot of information, particularly in terms of who the characters were.

I greatly appreciate the comment.

I am very familiar with the storied history behind John Dillinger, the mystique, the popularity and the fanfare… He was a bad guy and the FBI was on a mission. While this film did not deviate very far from the basic facts, and artistic license was excercised tastefully well, the storyline perhaps held on too tightly to itself with little regard for the audience. Although I knew how the film would end, the journey was not worth the price of admission.

Johnny Depp did a fine job in his role, and Christian Bale was adequate. However, from the very first scene I felt lost, as though I had stepped out for a while and come back in after some important scene. Scene to scene this film meandered, stumbled, tripped, sleepwalked, woke up, got lost and generally searched for any continuity, right up until the closing credits. The editor would make a poor bartender… cutting off each customer after only one sip.

The pace of the film is painfully slow and glaringly disjointed… even with the requisite violence and explosive, cracklingly loud gun battles, the end result is a snoozer. The flow just isnt there and this is VERY unfortunate. I really WANTED to like this film, but realized after leaving the theatre, that it didnt deliver. Add to this the cinematography as abhorrently bad. Over-the-top jittery, too close, dizzying, dark and confusing. If that was done for 'effect” it was a lousy effect, especially after 2+ hrs of the 'effect”.

Character development was non-existent. There is no background. The viewer is expected to have lived several years of Dillinger's life prior to the film starting…. This film would have made a fair sequel to itself had it been a second offereing to some other production…

Rarely am I this critical of a film Ive screened in a theater. I have been lucky to enjoy most every theatrical viewing Ive attended over the last 20 years. This film simply was not up to par.

I would highly recommend the 1973 John Milius film 'Dillinger' as required viewing before this film. Milius' film is by no means an Academy Award winner, and in no way would I say it is among the best films ever made, but Warren Oates' performance as John Dillinger is miles beyond Depp's, and Ben Johnson as Melvin Purvis, far more believable than Christian Bale. With a star studded cast, including a young Richard Dreyfuss, Harry Dean Stanton, Michelle Phillips, Cloris Leachman and Geoffrey Lewis, 'Dillinger' was a cult masterpece in a time when filmmaking was undergoing a vast transformation. John Milius put out a fast paced non-stop rollercoaster that did what only a number of films do in a given decade.

'Public Enemies' rates a far second to 'Dillinger'… Watch them both, and you may just agree.

Neither do I think the cinematographer did a bad job at all. Spinotti has a pretty impressive resume, including two Oscar noms.

On the other hand, it is a slow movie, and it is very definitely working a specific theory. As I implied, it's very much Manhunter, and very much not Silence of the Lambs. That's not going to work for a lot of people.

On the next other hand, I disagree that there was no character development, or that the viewer is expected to know much about who is who beforehand. It seemed to me that it delivered a lot of information, particularly in terms of who the characters were.

I greatly appreciate the comment.

I am very familiar with the storied history behind John Dillinger, the mystique, the popularity and the fanfare… He was a bad guy and the FBI was on a mission. While this film did not deviate very far from the basic facts, and artistic license was excercised tastefully well, the storyline perhaps held on too tightly to itself with little regard for the audience. Although I knew how the film would end, the journey was not worth the price of admission.

Johnny Depp did a fine job in his role, and Christian Bale was adequate. However, from the very first scene I felt lost, as though I had stepped out for a while and come back in after some important scene. Scene to scene this film meandered, stumbled, tripped, sleepwalked, woke up, got lost and generally searched for any continuity, right up until the closing credits. The editor would make a poor bartender… cutting off each customer after only one sip.

The pace of the film is painfully slow and glaringly disjointed… even with the requisite violence and explosive, cracklingly loud gun battles, the end result is a snoozer. The flow just isnt there and this is VERY unfortunate. I really WANTED to like this film, but realized after leaving the theatre, that it didnt deliver. Add to this the cinematography as abhorrently bad. Over-the-top jittery, too close, dizzying, dark and confusing. If that was done for 'effect” it was a lousy effect, especially after 2+ hrs of the 'effect”.

Character development was non-existent. There is no background. The viewer is expected to have lived several years of Dillinger's life prior to the film starting…. This film would have made a fair sequel to itself had it been a second offereing to some other production…

Rarely am I this critical of a film Ive screened in a theater. I have been lucky to enjoy most every theatrical viewing Ive attended over the last 20 years. This film simply was not up to par.

I would highly recommend the 1973 John Milius film 'Dillinger' as required viewing before this film. Milius' film is by no means an Academy Award winner, and in no way would I say it is among the best films ever made, but Warren Oates' performance as John Dillinger is miles beyond Depp's, and Ben Johnson as Melvin Purvis, far more believable than Christian Bale. With a star studded cast, including a young Richard Dreyfuss, Harry Dean Stanton, Michelle Phillips, Cloris Leachman and Geoffrey Lewis, 'Dillinger' was a cult masterpece in a time when filmmaking was undergoing a vast transformation. John Milius put out a fast paced non-stop rollercoaster that did what only a number of films do in a given decade.

'Public Enemies' rates a far second to 'Dillinger'… Watch them both, and you may just agree.