Public Enemies (2009)

2/5

Michael Mann's Public Enemies is a disappointment from start to finish. The plot follows bank robber John Dillinger (Depp) in the early 1930's and the rising crime spree that spurs the police to declare a war on crime. Melvin Purvis (Bale) is put in charge of the Dillinger Squad and is responsible for taking him down, dead or alive. Where Mann's films usually succeed--tense action--here he fails. The gunfights are little more than confusing cuts and annoying noise. The fact that everyone looks, dresses, and talks the same makes it even harder to tell what's going on and who's getting shot. It completely deflates the tension. Mann's use of digital cameras at night without lighting worked in his modern revision of Miami Vice, but the grainy picture feels anachronistic in this film. The romance with Billie Frechette (Cotillard) actually feels slightly stronger here than in his previous films, although love stories were never his strong suit. But all in all, it's a fairly frustrating film and simply doesn't live up to my expectations. I don't know who should see this film, but I would not recommend it.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1152836/

Thief (1981)

2/5

What I love about all of Michael Mann's movies is the mood, the sense of cool. Even if you have no idea what's going on, you always get a feeling of just how awesome the people you're watching are. The second quality is the acting--Mann consistently manages to bring out the best in his actors. That's all this movie has. Oh, and good music, although it's heavily dated with its 80's techno synth rock.

The movie attempts to combine heist movie with family drama. It doesn't work because the tension is lost with the dramatic punctuations and the drama never gets fully explored because the heist elements remove a sense of realism. The plot is convoluted and unclear; you have to pay extremely close attention to the dialogue to know what's going on. Even then, you might still have trouble because a lot of the time there are no establishing shots (in the adoption agency, for example). The editing is awful. Scenes go on for way too long, often without introduction and ending suddenly. The sound work is even worse; it reminded me of my own movies. The dialogue is hard to understand as a result, which makes the plot confusing as well. And that's not something you want in a professionally-produced feature film.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0083190/

Ali (2001)

4/5

I knew nothing about Muhammad Ali's life story going in, so this movie was a very eye-opening experience for me. I like how the movie wasn't simply a boxing movie, but really dug into all aspects of his character, including the social and political realms he affected. His motto, "float like a butterfly, sting like a bee," could describe this movie as well. It flows naturally from scene to scene buoyantly and then strikes the viewer hard when the fight scenes occur. Technically, this movie matches Mann's other works. The crisp and beautiful cinematography by Lubezki is exceptional in this piece, bringing a visceral realism to the fights and ethereal fluidity to the rest. The music was spot-on, although sometimes a bit too prevalent. The acting by all parties was outstanding, although I think Smith's acting in the title role was slightly too weak to carry the entire picture (although quite strong overall). But it was really fun to hear Ali trash-talk.

It did have quite a few problems as well, I thought. It was too long. It meandered in meaningless areas that I never really cared for (although more knowledgeable fans might have found them interesting) and unexplained subplots. A firm sense of time and place was never really achieved. There were no dates or locations to inform the audience; the only markers were social events like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr.'s deaths. The problem with the amazing cinematography was that Mann got too enamored of it, unable to cut parts out to keep the piece tight. The editing was competent for the most part, but failed to impress. Other than these minor squabbles, though, I really liked the film.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0248667/

The Last of the Mohicans (1992)

3/5

The Last of the Mohicans feels more like a Mel Gibson movie than a Michael Mann movie. The plot follows the French and Indian War as an action movie, a romance, and a historical period piece. But it doesn't quite live up to expectations as a Michael Mann action movie because he spends too much time on the other genres, and he's much much better as an action director. It took bits and pieces from varying genres and threw them together with no regard to its target audience. In addition, there were a number of subplots that were never followed up on (e.g., the colonials defending their homeland). Because there were so many, you leave not really knowing the point of most of the movie. I felt like it could have been a 30-minute movie and I still would have gotten the same overarching message. The action was too tame; it felt like a PG-13 movie and not an R movie. Where was the Michael Mann I know and love? Also, the dialogue he fills his movies with is usually slick and cool. There wasn't much of that in this movie, and it felt like he sacrificed that for generating a mood of time and place. Which is a shame, because I love his dialogue.

And yet there are a great number of positives. It was extremely well-shot and well-edited. That is what kept reminding me that it is not a Mel Gibson movie--it looked too good. They really took advantage of their locations and sets, and shot setups and framings were absolutely phenomenal. The music, while overbearing sometimes, was overall very effective at kick-starting the action and getting your blood pumping. While there were a number of subplots, they actually fit together quite nicely. The relationship that blossomed between the two minor siblings was unexpected and unique, fleshing out the story. Also, I didn't realize it would go so in depth into the "bad guy's" background and reasons for seeming so inhuman. It was a surprising and quite welcome asset to the movie that made it a richer action movie than I expected. And there are bits and pieces that are just stand-out. One line of dialogue I can't stop thinking about because of its subtler meanings and the fierceness with which Daniel Day-Lewis delivers the line: "They're not strangers, and they stay where they lay." Overall, a pretty good movie, but it left me feeling just a bit unsatisfied.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0104691/

Miami Vice (2006)

4/5

I saw this with Sameer, Kyle, Joe, and Erik, and none of them thought it was very good. I, on the other hand, found Michael Mann's latest movie to be the flat-out best action movie so far this year. It had some of the most tense and taut scenes I have ever witnessed in any movie. The last hour was cinema at its absolute best. The soundtrack was consistently amazing--something that everybody in the group agreed on.

The middle part was a bit slow, but never boring. Half the time I didn't understand what people were saying due to accents, but it didn't really matter. It was about crime and being cool, not the plot. It was the mood that Mann captured perfectly.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0430357/