by Michael Mann
Well, a word about it's director is needed
when discussing Public Enemies, since Michael
Mann (as it is expected of any author) has some
peculiar features, a signature if you please,
which so far hasn't really done much more than
get some complements from 'well trained eyes' or
served as backing up argument by
defenders of the new school of cinema when discussing
the improvement this slightly different way of doing
what has being around for over a century has brought
into the so called cinematographic language.
But In Public Enemies a parentheses must
be added, Not only due to the favoring
comments from critics and general public
alike, and to the great performances
of it´s acting crew but because in this particular work
Michael Man did what any Sci-Fi Hero wishes to do:
"Break the Barriers of Time".
Well the story takes place on the 40's, On the time
America was learning how to be America.
Perhaps the most powerful feature on the 'play' is
this pointing out of the maturing process of a nation,
with all it´s dreams and fragilities.
Well that´s the scenario we are introduced to,
and we are ushered into it by our hero
and all his cleverness,
mr. John Dillinger (Jhonny Depp)
who would have succeeded in rescuing all his pals
if it wasn´t for the not so clever associates
he´s forced to work with.
Dillinger doesn´t see any wrong on robbing
from the government, in fact he even claims that
his 'profession' was actually implanted on him
due to the unfairness of the 'system'.
With such mentality coupled with his skills and
boldness he ends up very famous, to the point of
bothering some 'big shot' politicians, since his
positive public image reflected the their
government´s negative one.
That was truly his biggest sin, charisma.
For as it is displayed in here, It isn´t about the
amount one steals but of the amount of
attention one gets.
So John Dillinger became Public Enemy #1,
and that´s how the movie came to be.
The picture tells us of his tragedy,
being cornered first by the cops, then by his old
'compadres' up until he´s left alone
without the girl he loved.
OK! with all this trivia info, we are ready to look
into what really transcends the ordinary, and
'I guarantee this ain´t no ordinary movie'.
When one engages to take a close look on this work,
he discovers that Public Enemies causes an
unfamiliar sensation, a clever one,
that happens to never be felt before in any
Michael Mann´s film, Because this time, he adapted
a not 'nowadays story'.
Interesting enough the combination of his
choice coupled with his´s signature,
resulted on Anachronism;
Anachronism in the best of it´s kind.
Mann´s way of directing a movie,
the 'Urgent' camera, always leading us to
something, never still. His mastering
of this 'new' technology [which a first divided the crowd of
film makers and now is as essential as a tooth brush] known as
the digital camera,
And Off course his framing technics,
the pattern of excluding the 'big picture',
as if sole 'knowing' and periodically
being reminded that 'we are' in a
40´s movie is more than enough,
[the precise time elements weren´t his focus and
it shouldn´t be ours either]
in one phrase, Public Enemies sort of tell us:
If there´s something more universal
than the way we see things,
Is the way we feel things,
Was Public Enemies a threat on
traditional cinema? or an attempt of a
[showing off] revolution?
Well I was thinking it was, up until the
cinema element was introduced on
the picture, how foolish of me...
John Dillinger last´s scenes are a
powerful discourse. Discourse which was
announced way before it´s actual
disclosing, when we were abruptly shown
of the seriousness of our hero´s situation
in no better place than cinema itself,
[''have you seen this man?'']
the climax:
Right before Dillinger´s last appearing
he visits the police office,
and calmly observes his observers,
he literally recalls every scene
of the film, as if he watches his
own movie along with us,
in preparation to the climax yet
unknown to us (and him).
So we are [once more] led to the theater,
where Dillinger is watching a film
about a guy that looks a lot like him,
and that earns money the same way he
does, and on top of all that, this dude´s girl
sort of reminds him of his own baby girl,
[his black bird.]
(Manhatan Melodrame by W S Van Dyke -1934)
Why?
Well is important to point out, more at this point than
at any previous one, that this is a film based
on a real story, not any real story but on
one of such popularity as to reach indeed the status of
urban legend, told and retold throughout the years.
That´s actually the big deal in it all, the real
Dillinger did indeed go to the movies
that night.
thus the metalinguistic discourse is first
held on the life´s perspective,
in the real life´s version of public
enemies, we have: life denouncing
'film'. For the robber was real,
the film wasn´t.
But in the cinematographic version of it
we have film denouncing 'life',
as if the movie watched that night by
our Jhonny Dillinger was the actual
reality element denouncing
our digital filmed film.
So let us now get back to the Dillinger who actually
interests us, our hero: the character, because he
reveals us a very important thing:
For if he, as mentioned was the one watching
the picture along with us,
then:
cinema itself was his climax.
[meaning the most dramatic part of a script/play usually ushering the
end of the story,]
This metalinguistic and poetic discourse is followed
by the death of our hero, who died as a symbol
of a time who moved on.
So it´s not about a new way over an old way of doing
cinema, but the whole thing, old and new.
The anachronism, spoken of, is in sum
a form honoring the past, by linking us
to a time we didn´t live, but that
is available, not only to be seen (as facts
are) but felt through experiencing
cinema itself.
Now we got a climax, and a heck of a good one,
painted in red.
So Public Enemies is perhaps more than any other
thing an ode to cinema,
and it´s time transcending effects,
as it plays with our perception of our time and
reality...
