The movie has several characteristics:
1. It is a movie that is quite loyal to real people in Hollywood. Adapted from a documentary "Public Enemies: America's Greatest Crime Wave and the Birth of the FBI, 1933-34" by financial reporter Bryan Burrough . Brought to the big screen by director Michael Mann.
2. The background of the times is very attractive. The 1930s was the period of the Great Depression under President Roosevelt. There were many well-known criminals who were at large at the time: Baby Face Nelson ("Baby Face" Nelson), Pretty Boy Floyd ("Pretty Boy" Floyd), and the protagonist of the movie, John Dillinger, and so on. Take John Dillinger as an example. In history, he did rob many banks, went to jail twice, successfully escaped twice, and even swaggered around in the police station, inspected his own photos, and talked to the police. Accelerated a few words. He was promoted by the FBI as "number one public enemy". However, due to the background of the Great Depression, many people had grudges against the government and banks, so they actually regarded John Dillinger as a hero. They narrated the anecdote that John Dillinger did not take bank customers' money, but only took bank money, and they welcomed John Dillinger. Their attitude makes the FBI’s “Public Enemy Number One” slogan untenable.
The story of the FBI agent (Melvin Purvis) is also very tortuous. I saw the life introduction of this real person on the wiki: he was involved in tracking down several big fugitives, "babyface" Nelson and "beautiful boy" Freud have all his credit for falling off the horse. But he was dismissed by his boss jealously, and someone took over him to hunt down John Dillinger, but the man was shot by John Dillinger. When he was dying, Melvin Purvis visited him. Melvin Purvis later resigned from the FBI. Many years later, he was shot in the head and died. The FBI concluded that he committed suicide.
In short, these complicated people, stories, and special experiences are quite interesting to understand.
3. Movies are shot in HD (high definition) mode instead of traditional film. The director explained that he wanted the audience to have a sense of participation and no sense of distance. I think this might make the picture clearer. (But I don't feel any difference. What about everyone?)
4. The lineup is very strong:
Johnny Depp (Johnny Depp) plays the bandit boss John Dillinger in this movie. Needless to say, he is very charismatic, likes to try different and a little weird characters, and they all explain them well. His performances in the Caribbean islands were so awesome that I thought the actors must be so ugly and weird, but when I watched them, I found that they turned out to be handsome. Later, I watched him and Kate Winslet (Kate Winslet) in Finding Neverland (Finding Neverland), he played a very childlike writer who created Peter Pan, the acting is also very good. I have also seen him play Secret Window, a schizophrenic writer, with a weird story, a bit like Fight Club to a certain extent, but it also has his style. . . By the way, even the girlfriends this guy finds, such as kate moss (supermodel Kate Moss), are very personal.
Christian Bale (Christian Bell) plays FBI agent Melvin Purvis in this movie. He has also acted in several good films: the Batman series, and The Prestige (Fatal Magic). I like them all. He feels like a quiet, complicated and playful person.
Actress Marion Cotillard (Marion Cotillard) plays the woman of the robber boss in this movie. She is French and won the best actress Oscar in 2008. Very beautiful and pure, with big eyes.
The above is to look at the previous understanding. Let me talk about my feelings after reading:
Advantages: 1. The performances of the actors are indeed quite satisfactory. Performed the cool, firm, intelligent and emotional of the robber boss. Showed the cuteness and loyalty of the eldest woman. The performance of the FBI agent's silence, determination, and resistance to blows. . Although the agent's change does not convince me, I think it is the screenwriter's responsibility. . Among the three, the performance of the actress surprised me the most.
2. The background of the times is really interesting. More than 70 years ago, the clothes people wore, the cars they drove, the radios they watched, the looks of the banks, and the background of the economic depression were all things with a sense of history. They were fully shown in this movie and made people Find it interesting.
Disadvantages:
I feel empty after watching it. It seems that the movie is missing something. Over two hours, the film is a bit like simple-minded action movies with hurried storytelling: escape, robbery, arrest, escape again, escape, runaway, the boss is arrested, the boss is going to save her, and the result is killed. End. In the middle, the cleverness and emotion of the robber played by Johnny Depp was slightly rendered. It's almost the whole story. After reading it, I thought: "Oh, okay. He is dead, and I can guess it with my toes". There is nothing else to take away.
I have to blame the screenwriter. I think that such a robber should have more stories, more complexity, and more exciting. Although the film also involves his growth (through his words and phrases), his philosophy (through his watching movies, resonance with the plot of the movie), and his influence on the public in the context of the Great Depression (through everyone’s His aisle welcome), but it's just a little bit of a splash. Ninety percent of the time is spent on robbery and jailbreaking-but the robbery and jailbreaking are not fully explained, so I don't worry at all. With this time, I might as well revisit the TV series Prison break ("Prison Break"), at least it will be more tortuous.
As for the FBI that Dale played, I felt that the screenwriter wanted to explain the changes in his mood, but he didn't have time to make it clear. He was originally a firm and righteous man, but then he appeared lost. In the end, the subtitles also showed that he quit his job at fbi a year later and committed suicide many years later. But because of his lack of roles, this change is very unconvincing. I don't know why these changes are, and there is no real story that is appealing.
In short, movies seem to lack depth, storytelling, and attractiveness. If they can express the human part more fully, or tell stories, I would like it more. Don't justify the director's loyalty to the original, so there is no room for play. Because movies should be good-looking, attractive, and leave something to others.
View more about Public Enemies reviews
