Sorry this is so late, but I have been very busy and I ran into some Internet issues. I am at the library, indulging in the romance of being around knowledge and felt compelled to take a shit on this film.
After following this film for about a year or two I had extremely high hopes with what the final cut would bring to me! I think that might have been my problem. I knew a lot about Dillinger already and this film seemed to be a sip of water for those who did not know much about the great American bank robber.
The actual filming of it was interesting, shot on the fancy handhelds, but it made for uncomfortable situations and odd close ups on the actors. I can see why it would fit the film with the fast passed, violent lives of these gangsters, but it was not my cup of tea.
The acting was great! I have no complaints about anyone in the film. But the writing was bad. It seemed like Michael Mann spent more time worrying about the filming than writing a good script. There were a lot of Dillinger one liners for the ladies that made him seem like a comedic bro more so than a suave man.
Overall this film had so much potential to be something that would change how we viewed gangsters. Michael Mann searched "John Dillinger" on wikipedia and made his film from there. The characters refused to grow into anything and have an end goal for themselves. It is a shame that no one will touch this topic for some time, leaving this odd taste in our mouths.
5/6-10
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It makes me sad that the film didn't live up to expectations. I really wanted to see it, but now I don't know.
ReplyDeleteword.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to have to agree on most of what you said.
I just got back from watching it (after reading your review) and agree. I think I may have noticed some of the things you mentioned because I read it first, but it was apparent either way. And in my opinion Dillinger seemed like a dick, more than a bro, instead of sauve most of the times. And yes to the wikipedia note!
ReplyDelete