Posted: 12/24/2009 5:55:25 PM EDT
|
So far pretty kick ass. Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, Stephen Dorf.
|
|
Meh. I fell asleep about halfway through it. If a movie can't hold my attention enough to keep me awake, chances are it's just not that entertaining. I usually give these types of movie a second chance on a different day right after a cup of coffee, so the jury's still out on this one. |
|
Apart from the gunfights, I found it incredibly boring, and actually a very poor representation of what was going on, had I not watched a history channel special on Dillinger and company, I would have had ABSOLUTELY no freaking clue what the hell was going on throughout the movie, no narration, no story progression, just a bunch of "events" that, if i had no historical knowledge, would make absolutely no sense to me as to why it was occurring.
This movie could have been a lot better than it was, i was wholly disappointed (except for the gunfights, those were quite awesome, lots of old gun porn) |
|
Quoted: Apart from the gunfights, I found it incredibly boring, and actually a very poor representation of what was going on, had I not watched a history channel special on Dillinger and company, I would have had ABSOLUTELY no freaking clue what the hell was going on throughout the movie, no narration, no story progression, just a bunch of "events" that, if i had no historical knowledge, would make absolutely no sense to me as to why it was occurring. This movie could have been a lot better than it was, i was wholly disappointed (except for the gunfights, those were quite awesome, lots of old gun porn) You just explained why it was a great film. The director & screenwriter didn't assume you were clueless about one of the most famous criminals in the history of our nation, and presented the facts in a linear, non-bullshit way as if you were intelligent and could do the math on what was going on. You are, unwittingly, complaining that it wasn't dumbed down enough.  I like movies, tremendously, that don't resort to predictable plot devices, narrative or characters that spoon feed us everything. |
|
bought it a few days ago. I thought it was great. The action scenes were great.I did'nt realize that micheal mann had directed it until the shootout scenes.
Thats when i looked at the DVD box and saw that he directed it. I've watched it three times in the past week 
|
|
It was pretty good. I'm a pretty big fan of '30's gangster history, and while it had a few errors in timeline, it was pretty good. I did feel slightly underwhelmed with the gun fights. For a Mann film, I was expecting a bit more....I dunno...Moar.
I did like the prison guard guns. When the movie was originally out, we had a thread about those guns. The prop guys did a bang up job making sure those forefathers of the Mini-14 were done up right, including popular 'mods' the guards and gangsters did to them. And, finally, I thought Depp did a great job as Dillinger. It really showed how guys like Clyde Barrow really tried to emulate him in their crimes. (The leaping over the counters, dual guns, flirting with the ladies while holding up the teller, etc.) Course, Dillinger himself picked that stuff up from the movies of the time. |
|
Meh, ok flick, a little flat. Considering the subject material, it could have been a GREAT movie.
I can't think of ANY reason to change well-known, documented historical facts, but if I HAD to for some reason, I'd change them in the direction of MORE gunplay and broads, not LESS. And I wouldn't fag Dillinger up for the 2009 audience, either - like, I highly doubt that Dillinger cried when they locked up his girlfriend 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Apart from the gunfights, I found it incredibly boring, and actually a very poor representation of what was going on, had I not watched a history channel special on Dillinger and company, I would have had ABSOLUTELY no freaking clue what the hell was going on throughout the movie, no narration, no story progression, just a bunch of "events" that, if i had no historical knowledge, would make absolutely no sense to me as to why it was occurring. This movie could have been a lot better than it was, i was wholly disappointed (except for the gunfights, those were quite awesome, lots of old gun porn) You just explained why it was a great film. The director & screenwriter didn't assume you were clueless about one of the most famous criminals in the history of our nation, and presented the facts in a linear, non-bullshit way as if you were intelligent and could do the math on what was going on. You are, unwittingly, complaining that it wasn't dumbed down enough.
I like movies, tremendously, that don't resort to predictable plot devices, narrative or characters that spoon feed us everything. +1 |
|
Quoted: Apart from the gunfights, I found it incredibly boring. Same. Also I found that the dialogue was garbled. I at times had no clue what was going on due to crappy scene transitions. There's also some major historical inaccuracies. On a side note I wonder why Mann forgot to put in his signature Mozambique Drill that he puts into many of his gun porn type movies. |