men + guns + hats = happy Susan

(I wish more people wore hats)

Occasionally, it's helpful to have gaps in your education. Despite Dad's best efforts, I know very little about American history. I can recognize important names, and can put together a very vague timeline of important events, but that's about it. Most of the time it's frustrating and embarrassing, but last night, it paid off.

(It is so nice to see his real face again. Where'd you get that scar, Johnny?)

Public Enemies is the story of John Dillinger - legendary bank robber and American anti-hero. Michael Mann (Hancock, The Aviator) directs in his typical fancy fashion. Again, my ignorance shows here - Steven swears there's some special name for the cinematography, but neither of us know what it is. All I know is, it's pretty. And flashy. And full of those great "production qualities" that I love so much. Most of the reviews written about the movie criticize the decision to make the film at all because everyone knows how the story ends. How can you possibly build suspense when you know the outcome? Enter: my generation. A bunch of know-nothings with an affinity for pretty pictures and pretty people. I caught myself holding my breath through many of the scenes in the movie. I knew the end, but I didn't know how or when. Johnny Depp does a wonderful job of bringing this legend to life - to real life, in a true, 3 dimensional character. He's not just a bank robber, he has a story, a motivation, a perspective that makes him choose to rob these banks and love these women and make the silly decisions over and over and over again. Through Depp, you love the anti-hero, and hope, foolishly, that Mann will decide to re-write history.

(She lubs him. In real life - I'm sure of it)

Mann's crazy cinematograhpy works here, because these are beautiful, powerful characters. You want to understand them, but the camera keeps moving. The few times when it stops, and lets the audience really see a straight profile shot, is incredibly effective. It seems to work as a rhetorical device, allowing the emotion to swell at all the right moments. Perhaps this is what cameras are supposed to do, to narrow the field of vision on important moments, while setting the tone for other scenes. This is the first time that I've actually considered it as a narrative tool. At the very least, it's captivating. The 1930's are my favorite cinematic decade. You've got sweet accents, pet names, adorable costumes and all the little small-town details that I dream of finding in antique stores. It is my ideal world, and I was perfectly content to live in Mann's creation for the full 2.5 hour epic.

(Cotillard calls this a $3 dress. Shenanigans!)

Regardless of how much you know about the true tales of Dillinger and his co-horts, it's still a fascinating part of history. Good movies based on true stories can even inspire the young and lazy to do their own research, and dig out those textbooks they so enthusiastically ignored. Maybe Mann chose to make the movie to help inform society about the history of the FBI. Maybe he's passionate about tommy guns and 30's cars. In the end, I don't care why, I'm just glad he did it.

(The tommy guns were beyond cool)