RONALD B. RAFF

24 May 2012

This could be one of the biggest days of your life.........dont make it your last.

What makes "Dillinger" an edge of your seat actioner is Warren Oates'tongue in cheek portrayal of the legendary bank robber. Oates staggersback and forth between being likable and cold blooded, much like thereal John Dillinger. His character development is masterfully on key.The supporting cast of Richard Dreyfus, Michelle Phillips, Harry DeanStanton and Ben Johnson all play their parts to the hilt. I especiallyenjoyed Johnson's steely eyed portrayal of FBI agent Melvin Purvis.With his no nonsense attitude, he epitomizes the iron fisted stereotypeof the depression era G-Man.The rip roaring gun battles will definitely keep your attention.Director John Milius makes the most of his firearms expertise. Thelegendary shoot out at Little Bohemia displays incredible realism asthe cast is pummeled about by the heavy recoiling Browning AutomaticRifles. Automobile's and people alike are riddled with reckless abandonby the famous Tommy Guns of yesteryear. You could almost swear liveammunition is being used. The audual and visual effects are first ratein spite of the films tight budget.Another interesting aspect is the films digression into semidocumentary mode featuring the exploits of other depression gangsterslike Machine Gun Kelly. We are made aware that the Dillinger gang werenot the only ones terrorizing the Midwest.Costumes, antique cars and sets are historically accurate. The menssuits in particular are quite gaudy and accurately reflect the style ofthose days.There is never a dull moment and the movie paces itself at a rapidclip. While not a masterpiece, "Dillinger" is an accurate andentertaining retelling of the rat-a-tat-tat era.

pljewkes

24 May 2012

Blood bath

After a pretty slow start, DILLINGER erupts into a fast movingbloodbath. Warren Oates has the title role and Ben Johnson is the cigarchomping, G-man extraordinaire Melvin Purvis. It's great to see so manycharacter actors in one film: Oates, Johnson, Geoffrey Lewis, HarryDean Stanton, John Ryan. It's Oates who carries the film and he'sexcellent in a rare lead. Michelle Phillips is "introduced" even thoughshe was already famous as a singer and had appeared in Dennis Hopper'sTHE LAST MOVIE. She's not bad as Oates' at first unwilling, then verywilling gun-moll. Cloris Leachman makes a late and hammy appearance asthe notorious "lady in red." Richard Dreyfuss is a very hot headed BabyFace Nelson.Whether or not the facts are kept straight is debatable but DILLINGERis the best of the post-BONNNIE AND CLYDE gangster films. John Miliushasn't directed a movie this good since.

23 May 2012

Definitive Dillinger

This is still the definitive biography of John Dillinger on film. Ijust saw Mann's Public Enemies - this film blows that one away. Forgiveme for quoting my own review of Mann's film: "Milius, taking his cue from "Bonnie And Clyde," from the earlierLawrence Tierney film "Dillinger," and from the gaudy gangster films ofRoger Corman, fashioned a film that was both flashy yet homespun, partunabashed B-movie, part evocation of American Gothic. Even hisoccasional tinkering with historical accuracy could be forgiven, sinceit was clear he had a firm grasp on what the Dillinger phenomenon wasreally all about - 'farm boy makes good by turning bad' is anundeniable folk-theme of American life. And the brilliance of WarrenOates' performance in the Milius film is that Oates plays Dillingerlike a runaway farm-boy with a sense of humor and a quick temper, whojust happened to rob banks for a living. That's as much as you can giveany professional criminal without lying about the nature of crimenamely, it's about stealing other peoples' money and hurting many ofthem in the process." Other reviewers have remarked this as a B-movie - but it isintentionally so, it never makes any pretense otherwise; and that'simportant: having decided to make a B-movie leaves Milius withconsiderable leeway as to how far he wants to push any aspect of thematerial. So while it's hard to think of any particular dramatichigh-point of the film (perhaps the scene where Dillinger and Purvis goto the same restaurant, or the death of Pretty Boy Floyd?), it's muchharder to find any moment that really drags the film down - the pacingof the film is that of a B-movie, it moves! There's nothing exceptionalabout the cinematography or music, or production design; what we'releft with are memorable performances by some of the greatest characteractors in cinema at the time, and an exciting story with enough savvyto trigger our emotions.Milius watched the Lawrence Tierney "Dillinger" and learned from itbefore starting this film; Mann should have watched Milius' film overand over before starting "Public Enemies." In any event, this is stillTHE Dillinger story, and and an entertaining action film as well.

Marty Brownd

23 May 2012

One of the best gangster movies ive ever seen.

If you are into gangster movies this one is it ! Warren Oates excells asJohn Dillinger and he even looks like him. A great cast as well with BenJohnson starring as G-man Melvin Purvis.As far as the video and audiorecording of this movie to DVD. I rate the video a 7 and the audio a 5. Iwish it would've been done in stereo at least but with this said,you'vesimply got to see this movie !

fedor8

21 May 2012

Entertaining but unrealistic.

A very well-directed gangster film with a top cast but what nearlyruined it for me was the total lack of realism regarding the ridiculousease with which Dillinger & co. "dodged" bullets; in particular the bigshoot-out in the 2nd half in which the G-men fell like flies, while thegang seemed invincible or immune to bullets even (a fortunate genetictrait, no doubt)! Even the gangsters' girlfriends were better shootersthan the FBI guys! It's a pity that the opportunity was missed to makeit more realistic, in this regard. As far as wounds are concerned, nocomplaints there: quite realistic. It's also absurd how many of thegang escape "the big shootout". The idealizing of the supposed "honour"between cops and robbers was occasionally too much to swallow butprovided some entertainment, at least. The movie is fast-paced, cleanlydone, and Ben Johnson is the absolute stand-out.

Christopher Mercurio

20 May 2012

This movie sucks

Once again I have seen a movie made by people that know nothing. I justrecently reviewed Baby Face Nelson. Now I've seen Dillinger and I'vehad it.This movie is garbage. I don't know how anyone in their right mindcould compare this to a classic like Bonnie and Clyde. This movie isfar from a classic. Someone called it brilliant. That's an insane thingto say. This movie can't get any facts straight and it has the worstcasting I've ever seen. I don't know whose dumb idea it was to castWarren Oates as John Dillinger. First of all he looks nothing like him.Second of all, by the time John Dillinger was killed he was 31. WhenOates made this he was 45! You could even tell that he's older than thereal Dillinger just by looking at him. Not only was he too old, but sowas Ben Johnson as Melvin Purvis.They show Baby Face Nelson die, then Homer Van Meter, and finally JohnDillinger. John Dillinger was killed before both of them. The last oneto die out of the three was Baby Face Nelson. Not only do the writersnot know when they died, but they also don't know how they died. BabyFace Nelson was not killed after he escaped from Little Bohemia in arobe. Homer Van Meter was not killed by farmers with shot guns. HomerVan Meter was cornered by the police in St. Paul and gunned down withmachine guns. Another member of Dillinger's gang, Harry Pierpont isshown being shot by police in this movie. Pierpont wasn't shot. HarryPierpont was captured and sentenced to die in the electric chair. I gointo what happened to Baby Face Nelson on my Baby Face Nelson review soI'm not going to go into it again here. Let me also add that RichardDreyfuss' portrayal of Baby Face Nelson is pathetic. There's a scenewhere he attacks Dillinger and then gets a bad beating. While Dillingerwas beating him he was crying like a baby and screaming, "Leave mealone!" Baby Face Nelson and John Dillinger never fought. MaybeDillinger didn't agree with Nelson's bank robbing methods, but theynever fought. Nelson also never cried like a little girl while gettingbeaten. They keep calling him Lester "Baby Face" Nelson. He was neverin his life known by that name. Nelson's real name was Lester Gillisand he changed his name to George Nelson. The black guy that escapedfrom jail with Dillinger was Herbert Youngblood, but in this movie heis known as Reed Youngblood. John Milius doesn't know anything. Wherethe hell did John Milius get his information? I could probably make abetter movie than him.Finally the way they showed John Dillinger die is outrageous andinexcusable. The movie shows Dillinger walk out of the Biograph withthe Lady in Red and his girlfriend Billie Frechette. By the way, BillieFrechette wasn't even there that night. But a girl named Polly Hamiltonwas. Melvin Purvis yells, 'Johnny!' Dillinger pulls out his gun and isblown to hell. It is a proved fact that Dillinger did not have a gunthat night. The FBI gave him no chance to surrender and as soon as hewas in sight they blew him away. They didn't even have to shoot him.They were so close that powder burns were found on his face. It wasmurder. They also say that the man killed that night was not JohnDillinger. After killing tons of civilians in the Little Bohemiaincident can you imagine the FBI reporting that they had just killedanother innocent unarmed man? The gun they had on display that wassupposedly on Dillinger was also proved not to have been manufactureduntil after Dillinger's death. I could go on and on how the man theykilled wasn't John Dillinger, but I'll stop here. If you would like toknow more check it out hereSee the Dillinger version with Lawrence Tierney if you want, but don'twaste your time with this inaccurate piece of garbage movie.

toddrandall68

20 May 2012

Excellent movie but slightly flawed

I loved every actor in this film. I was even impressed by michellephillips acting. Warren Oates is one of my favorite actors, but I feltat times he was a little less than believable in the role of Dillinger.Harry Dean Stanton and Richard Dreyfuss provided some lighter moreamusing scenes (such as the time at the gas station with the old manand when "Baby Face" joined the gang. The line by Dreyfuss where hesays "I don't take orders from anyone. I got my own way of takingbanks. I go in, take the money, and kill everyone in sight" was such anexample of light "humor" in an otherwise violent and intense movie.)What frustrates me in true stories most of the time is the historicalinaccuracies. Harry Pierpont was executed by electrocution, not killedby the cops on a bridge, and "Baby Face" was killed 4 months afterDillinger. This, in no way takes away from the greatness of this film,and may have served to make the story in the film better.I have read some of the other comments to this movie and I am a littleconfused. This movie was not a documentary. I am a little frustrated byhistorical accuracies also, but that doesn't take away from the pointof a film. If this was a documentary, I would have howled at themshowing "Baby Face" or Homer Van Meter dying before John Dillinger. Butit is not a documentary but an "action packed" portrayal of a muchlarger story. If you want to draw morals or statements from this typeof film it would be a "live by the sword, die by the sword" statement.If they showed, for instance, Jesse James dying at Northfield, MN in amovie it would be historically inaccurate, but not far from the fact ofhim eventually being killed in part of a much larger violentatmosphere.If you want historical accuracy, read a book, or more "exciting"primary documents, if you want a sense of the violent atmosphere of the"public enemy era" in a short time (while eating popcorn even) watch amovie like "Dillinger."Stories I have heard about the shootout in Mason City, Iowa by theDillinger gang, and the shootout outside of Des Moines, Iowa by theClyde Barrow gang have served to make me obsessed with these storiessince I grew up in Central Iowa.I recommend both "Dillinger," and "Bonnie and Clyde" because they areboth great movies about Depression era outlaw gang life (AKA "publicenemy era.") If you had to choose only one I would pick "Dillinger" asthe most believable and intense, and "Bonnie and Clyde" for the acting,although stilted action (Warren Beatty plays an awesome Clyde Barrow.)"Bonnie and Clyde" is more of a love story then the an "action packed"gang story of "Dillinger," hence the more contrived action scenes ofthe former.

xerses13

20 May 2012

Its not History...Its a Movie

DILLINGER (1973) is a well mounted though historically flawed filmvision of his ADVENTURES in the early 1930's. The charismatic criminal'Dillinger' (Warren Oates) with his band of merry men steal their wayto a lifestyle that the unfortunate honest people of the GreatDepression can only see on the Silver Screen. Director John Miliusconveys a view that it is better to live a glamorous (if dishonest andviolent) short life then to live like a dog in the dirt. "BETTER A DEADLION THEN A LIVE DONKEY" is the main thrust of this film.'Dillnger' has two (2) important people in his life. 'Billie' (MichellePhillips) his main squeeze and 'Purvis' (Ben Johnson) the long arm ofthe law (F.B.I). There is fine interplay between these characters andboth supply our hero with what he needs. Ms. Phillips is effective andparticularly attractive. Interesting when she was with the group 'TheMamas and the Papas' we did not think much of her. Must have been thosehorrible 1960's costumes which passed as fashion at the time. She looksvery chic in her 1930's garb. Mr. Johnson though to old for the roleperforms in his usual professional way and seems to really enjoy hiswork rubbing out the criminals.A very competent cast of character actors portray the merry men (andtheir molls). Future star playing 'Nelson' (Richard Dreyfuss) is ofparticular interest really getting into the role of that psychotic. Inone (1) scene he massacres a row of civilians to get one (1) lawofficer. At the Little Bohemia shoot out he challenges the F.B.I. with"Eat It G-Man" and a stream of .45 A.C.P. from his Thompson Sub-MachineGun Model 1921. Certainly different then 'Matt Hooper' or 'Roy Neary'.Director Milius paid careful attention to period details. Cars,Clothes, Firearms, Music with integrated period photos and clips fromold films into montage scenes supported the feeling you were in thatera. As for Historical accuracy, it is always best to go to the libraryor consult The History Station and equivalents.We saw the film when it first came out and just recently picked up theDVD. It is still very enjoyable if you take it for what it is.Interesting it's predecessor BONNIE AND CLYDE (1967) does not hold upas well and it's historical distortions are more irritating. CharacterBlanche (Estelle Parsons) needs to stop a bullet early in the film.

chaos-rampant

19 May 2012

A solid gangster b picture with Warren Oates in great shape

Sam Arkoff and AIP really seem to have put the hand deep in the pocketfor Dillinger. It's not quite an A-list picture however, but it'snothing short of what one would expect from a production company thatknows its entertainment (and on a budget).The biopic on the life and times of Depression-era bank robber JohnDillinger lacks the dynamics of a "rise and fall" kind of story becausewe are introduced to Dillinger the bank robber from shot one-literally. The hows and whys of his character are absent and with themthe insight in his persona is largely diminished. The maincharacterization the protagonist is given is that of a man in awe andlove of his own mythos, as much concerned with quick money as he iswith fame. The rest of the characters are painted in broad, sometimessloppy, strokes - Dillinger's girlfriend for example goes from hatingand wanting to run away from him to love a bit too fast. The antagonistis ruthless and grim FBI agent Melvin Purvis (Ben Johnson) and hisno-nonsense attitude at times makes Dillinger seem like a schoolboy bycomparison.Warren Oates delivers another superb performance as the titular bankrobber, violent, humorous and sardonic in right measures and with thatvery same natural charisma that made him such a successful characteractor. It's through his presence that the whole movie is lifted fromforgettable pulp to a crime action flick well worth seeing. John Miliuson the other hand is no Peckinpah or Hellman however. His direction isas much hit or miss as the acting - which is only natural as this washis debut. He has an eye for pictorial beauty and filming action butother scenes are somewhat stilted. His main ally in making Dillingereasy on the eyes are the beautiful locations and Midwest exteriors. Idon't know how authentic the period details are (or Dillinger's storyfor that matter) but I'd say he captures the atmosphere of the timesquite well and his black and white montages seem to be saluting 30'sWarner Bros gangster flicks.Overall Dillinger is quite consistent in that it's uneven. You neverget the sense that you're watching a truly great movie and the scripthas its fair share of problems but it's too damn entertaining andpleasing in a low-brow, nostalgic way all the same.

Lechuguilla

18 May 2012

Public Enemies

G-man Melvin Purvis (Ben Johnson) chases bank robber John Dillinger(Warren Oates) high and low, in this Depression-era action flick that'sheavy on gunfights and short on character development. Throughout thefilm, a herd of other public enemies, including Harry Pierpont, HomerVan Meter, Baby Face Nelson, Pretty Boy Floyd, among others, stampedethe plot, diverting us away from Dillinger the man. It's as if allthese hoodlums suddenly exploded on the scene, without benefit of achildhood or motivation of any kind, and one of these hoodlums justhappened to be Dillinger.Multiple shootouts go on and on and on. Bang, bang, bang ... dyingbodies jerk, squirm, twitch, and lurch, with lots of blood. Antiquatedautos zoom away at twenty miles an hour, tip over, crash, and blow-up.And Purvis smokes lots of cigars.Another irritation is the casting of Warren Oates. He looks way too oldto play Dillinger. An unknown, younger actor would have been moreconvincing.On the other hand, the film's color cinematography and terrificproduction design create an authentic 1930s look and feel, helped alongby era songs, like "Red River Valley" and "Happy Days Are Here Again".The outdoor scenes, especially, with those dirt roads and cheap framerural houses, convey a dreary, lonesome, forlorn mood, totally inkeeping with the poverty and hopelessness of that period.My impression of this film is similar to that of the more recentDillinger film "Public Enemies" (2009). Both films lack focus onDillinger. Both get carried away with action. And both do a great jobwith the Depression-era style. That is to say, in "Public Enemies" andin "Dillinger", the strength is the visuals; the weakness is mainly thescript.

Theo Robertson

16 May 2012

Inaccurate But Still A Good Movie

Reputation is a strange thing . Take John Dillinger for example . He waspublic enemy number one during the fledgling FBI`s war against organizedcrime gangs . He was a nasty piece of work who committed the murder of aChicago policeman called O`Malley but that why he wasn`t public enemy numberone , he was public enemy number one because he robbed banks , he was aprolific bank robber during an era when banks repossessed homes andbusinesses at the merest hint of not paying back loans , many hard workinghonest American citizens found themselves destitute because of the greed ofbanks in depression hit America . To many people bank robbers at this timewere viewed as Robin Hood types ( Even though they weren`t too keen ongiving to the poor ) and there does seem to be some very slight injustice inJohn Dillinger being public enemy number one when he was far from being theworst criminal in America . Hell he wasn`t even the worst member of theDillinger gang John Milius bio pic of DILLINGER is fairly inaccurate , for example MelvinPurvis wasn`t as portrayed here middle aged but a fairly young man , butMilius is a first rate director even though he`ll always be remembered forwriting the screenplay to APOCALYPSE NOW . Despite not having a massivebudget his shoot out scenes are bloody and brutal and reminded me of therecent Ridley Scott bloodfest BLACK HAWK DOWN . He also uses a very strikingvisual style for exposition featuring a montage of newsreel , stock footage, still photos and newspaper headlines . Milius also casts well by hiringBen Johnson ( Despite being too old for the role ) , Warren Oates , HarryDean Stanton , Geoffry Lewis and Richard Dreyfuss , all fine characteractors in a fine - though rather violent - gangster film

16 May 2012

Graphic for its time, brilliant even today

Violent 1973 portrait of Depression-era gangster John Dillinger, therelentless effort by the FBI to stop him, and the "folk hero" essence thatsurrounded his glory days. Warren Oates is flawlessly accurate as the titlevillain, and Ben Johnson is equally alluring as Melvin Purvis, the agentbent on getting his man, rounded out by finely portrayed supportingcharacters (such as Richard Dreyfuss as "Baby Face" Nelson and Steve Kanalyas "Pretty Boy" Floyd). Masterful combination of old-school Hollywood actionand new-generation graphic depiction. The perfectly photographed locationsadd to the character's (and the film's) essence. John Milius's directing iscasually brilliant.

bkoganbing

16 May 2012

Purvis Vs. Dillinger

Although Warren Oates makes one charismatic Dillinger in the title roleof this film, the story concentrates as much on Melvin Purvis the G-Manthat got him, played here by Ben Johnson.We meet Dillinger as a full blown criminal whose exploits and daringcaptured the public fancy in Depression Era America. With banks failingall over the country and people losing their life savings, bankers werenot among the most popular people in the USA in the Thirties. No matterthat these robberies didn't help the situation any, a lot of peoplewere glad someone besides the rich was just going in and taking themoney.Ben Johnson is a grim and determined Melvin Purvis, eager to theshooting down of FBI men in the Kansas City Massacre before J. EdgarHoover's agents were allowed to carry weapons. He did not howeverpersonally bag all the criminals he's credited with in this film. Nordid Pretty Boy Floyd played by Steve Kanaly later of Dallas ever runwith Dillinger's gang. However Baby Face Nelson aka Lester Gillis didand he's played as the psychotic punk he was by Richard Dreyfuss beforehe became a star.There's no real character development in this Dillinger, but certainlyenough action to satisfy those who want that in their movies. The filmhas a documentary like quality to it. The main female roles are playedby Michelle Phillips as Dillinger's girl Billie who stands by her manand in the end Cloris Leachman as the infamous Lady in Red who betrayshim. Neither actress is given much to work with in the script.I'm looking forward to the new Dillinger film with Johnny Depp thisyear. Knowing him, we'll get one interesting Dillinger. Still WarrenOates is the best we have so far.

ruinously

16 May 2012

Entertaining yarn that is way too long. (Obvious spoilers)

I liked this movie. It's subject matter, the life and death of JohnDillinger, has always interested me. It was nice seeing the stories Ihave read about him be brought to life by a very skilled ensemble cast.The setting is well displayed, especially Dillinger's Ford motorcar andthe Thompson submachine guns.Unfortunately, there are two flagrant errors in this film. The first isway to much dramatic license was taken, and it did not improve uponwhat really went down. The second is the fact that it never justifiesit's running time and would have come off much better if they hadtrimmed some scenes and not included others at all.Those two beefs aren't enough to stop me from recommending it to fansof the Dillinger story, as it does have it's moments. EspeciallyDillinger's escape from Crown Point and the final five minutes at theChicago movie theater where John met his fate.

julesee

14 May 2012

Warren Mania

My review might be a little biased because I love Warren Oates and willwatch anything he appears in (including obscure movies like 92 In theShade). However, I'd like to say that this is a very well-made gangsterflick that rivals Bonnie & Clyde in entertainment value. I actually preferthe action sequences in Dillinger to the famous ones from Bonnie & Clydebecause they seem rougher, more natural and less self-conscious. Theshooting sequences in Bonnie & Clyde seem too choreographed and slightlypretentious in comparison. Another selling point for Dillinger is that itcontains wonderful performances by Oates and Ben Johnson. Actually, BenJohnson almost steals the show as "G Man" Melvin Purvis. Even though theyonly have 1.5 scenes together, Oates and Johnson complement each othernicely here.

beatlemania909

13 May 2012

What is it Milius?

I just finished Dillinger, not even 10 minutes ago, and have realizedthat John Milius didn't know what kind of film he wanted to make. Attimes Dillinger is seen as a rough cruel crook, then he changes into aloving and respected hero. Warren Oates plays the title role, while BenJohnson plays Purvis, the man searching for Dillinger. These menportray the characters well, but my God were they old! Dillinger andPurvis were both 31 in this time period, while Johnson was 55 and Oateswas 45, I would have cast some younger actors since the characterslooked strange being so old. I will give it to Milius, the actionsequences are absolutely amazing. His directing is perfect, hisscreenplay, not so much. The characters seem forced at times, and thedialogue didn't keep me interested for long. It's worth a watch, but Ithink I'm going to return my copy and pick up Apocalypse Now instead.

Coventry

12 May 2012

Running around robbing banks, robbing banks!

Michael Mann's massively budgeted and heavily promoted "Public Enemies"was somewhat of a disappointment, at least to me personally, and thus Iwent searching for other cinematic versions of the JohnDillinger/Melvin Purvis saga. I quickly came across this biopic and itimmediately looked a lot more like my preference. "Dillinger" is anearly 70's film (the best era for cinema), with a splendid cast and anincredibly violent character. I don't know why exactly, but back in theseventies they were better at re-creating the desolate and grim 1930'sDepression Era than they are nowadays. The atmosphere and scenery usedin "Dillinger" feels a lot more authentic than in "Public Enemies",despite the fact this AIP-production probably didn't even cost onetenth to make. The life- story of John Dillinger is well-known. He wasan eloquent but dangerous bank robber in the Midwest area during theDepression era, but became particularly immortal when he was declaredpublic enemy number one by the FBI and idolized by the newspapers andmedia. Dillinger always collaborated with loyal and almost equallyinfamous partners (Homer Van Meter, Harry Pierpont, Baby Face Nelson,Pretty Boy Floyd) and wasn't ashamed to make public appearances withhis girlfriend Billie. Melvis Purvis, head of the Chicago bureau andright hand of FBI boss J. Edgar Hoover, devoted himself to capturingand killing Dillinger and his gang. The film is narrated in a more orless chronological order, with the emphasis lying on Dillinger's egoand Purvis' personal vendetta. Most of the criticism towards"Dillinger" comes from people claiming the script, penned down bydirector John Milius, isn't always fully accurate. Probably so, butthis merely concerns unessential details and – besides – if all moviesbased on true stories would be 100% accurate, they would be calleddocumentaries instead. I believe the facts are only slightly alteredand that strictly for entertainment purposes. The bank robberies andshootouts naturally form the highlights of the movie. They are quiteextended and very, VERY violent. Multiple cops and robbers areliterally perforated with machine gun ammunition and John Miliusblatantly depicts the bloody carnage of these battles. The soundtrackis great and very apt, with "The Gold Diggers' Song" and "Happy Daysare Here Again". The casting is extraordinary. With his rough looks andalmost naturally criminal charisma, Warren Oates is the best imaginablechoice ever to play John Dillinger. If you look up some pictures of thereal John Dillinger, you'll be stunned by the resemblance he bears withWarren Oates. I love Johnny Depp and all, but this role belongs toOates forevermore. Ben Johnson is terrific as FBI man Melvin Purvis andMichelle Phillips (1/4th of "The Mamas and the Papas") is quiteconvincing in her film debut as the love-interest Billie. Furthermorethere are several fantastic supportive roles for Harry Dean Stanton(one of the most underrated actors ever) as Homer Van Meter, GeoffreyLewis as Harry Pierpont and a very young and hardly recognizableRichard Dreyfuss as the ill-tempered and nasty Baby Face Nelson.

jzappa

11 May 2012

A Great Action-Adventure Fantasy

So there have been many movies based on real lives and true storieswhich have taken poetic license, but why do so to such an extent whenthe real lives and true stories are head over heels more intriguing andsurprising? For instance, think about the John Milius rendering of theMelvin Purvis raid on Little Bohemia lodge. Real life accounts leave noreservation that it was a disaster. But Milius spends a full 10 minuteson gunplay. Special agents collapse apparently by the dozens. Werethere enough G-men in the Midwest to supply extra bodies for such abloodbath? No, it seems more like Milius went nuts on the scene andtowed in extras by the truckload so that he could kill them with thoseskillful little discharging blood pods.This, more like Milius' Last Picture Show, is just another moviewritten and directed by a man with an obsession with firearms who playsfast and loose with the facts. As Purvis, Milius has cast Ben Johnson,and it's an bewildering choice. Johnson is measured, laid-back andcallous, and swears to take Dillinger himself. Before going intocombat, he has a formal procedure: An assistant agent gives him histwin handguns and lights his cigar. This behavior is the farthest thingfrom the real Purvis Milius could've ever gotten. Or the real Baby FaceNelson, for that matter, who was never a guy you could just slap aroundand make cry. How stupid. Also Dillinger himself, like many Chicagoans,in July went to the movies as much to evade the high temperature as tosee the flick, and the burdensome overcoats worn by the FBI are out ofseason.But this is all fine and I dismiss it readily. While Warren Oates isstunning in his physical resemblance to the eponymous anti-hero, whichis of course a genetic accident, he also charges the piece withincredible oomph and blistering force. It's a great performance,surrounded by quite a few others. And more than a story about theAmerican gangster, it's a blast of Milius' imaginary outrage towardliving during the Depression and rising up against the oppression. Yes,Milius, with his men's men and indulgent shootouts, is often comparedto Peckinpah. And while the comparison is apt, most are content to pinhim down as merely a Second Amendment-lovin' reactionary, and leave itat that. But there can hardly be a dramatist who's not in some sense ahumanist, an observer of humanity's inclinations.The mantra for the film (quite literally at one point) becomes "hardtimes." Dillinger doesn't have to do much scheming to stumble on eageraccessories or make a prison warden take his cut of a robbery madeimmediately after escape. As a Dust Bowl vagrant child observesreasonably enough, the one distinction between the robbers and thelawmen is that you have to go to school to be the latter. And whatyoung boy likes school more than guns and money? There's no stylizedpleasure extracted from seeing anyone get shot here. Characters screamin anguish as they die, and no one dies unproblematically. It's a filmthick with unanticipated poignancy, Dillinger's return to anacquiescent, heartbroken, patient father, or Harry Dean Stantonuttering that "things ain't workin' out for me today" in a way thatindeed no one else could.Like other Movie-Brat suggestions of the 1970s, it's also a story ofcinematic fathers and sons: To Milius, and to Bogdanovich andSpielberg, Johnson indicates the olden Ford and Waynes the next filmgeneration at once admires and challenges. Milius' explosions ofchaotic modernization is varied with a nostalgia for the propriety offilm's past.

E_D_N

09 May 2012

A relentless account of one mans downfall and the G-man behind it

John Milius's DILLINGER is a hardcore, fast-paced account of a G-Manpursuing and getting his man, one of the most notorious outlaws of thecentury.The problem the writer/director faces when dealing with historicalfigures is what kind of movie do I want to make? Do I want to lionizethe protagonist, make him bigger than life, a living myth? Or do I wantto show a man with all the failings that implies, struggling with thesame emotions the rest of us do? Milius here chooses the latterapproach, and Warren Oates as Dillinger is never less than human exudesthe requisite bark and menace but lacks, to some degree, the gravitasthat would have been needed to make him a more imposing figure.The film, unlike most of its kind, doesn't bother to probe thepsychological impulses that first drives an individual to crime. Thereare no flashbacks to Dillinger's childhood (we are only shown hiscoming home to an average, middle-of-the-road American family) andthose unfamiliar with the true story will have to assume that JohnDillinger, the bank robber and outlaw, is a natural by-product of theGreat Depression and the poverty that sweeps the nation. That sentimentis echoed in the scene in which Ben Johnson confronts a little boy.Used to be that cops, cowboys, and firefighters were boys' heroes.Well, not no more they're not. The kid, when told he has to go toschool to be a G-Man, bluntly retorts that "Dillinger didn't." "Buthe's in jail!" Purvis shoots back. The kid waves and walks away. Purvisis puzzled. Things have changed.Only later on, during Dillinger's confrontations with "Babyface" Nelsondo we get hints that Dillinger's bank-robbing spree is fueled bygrowing megalomania: "You can't kill me, punk! I'm immortal!" He hasembraced the myth that sensationalized press accounts of his exploitshave created and it becomes clear that Dillinger fancies himself a heroof the people, a rebel fighting Hoover, Roosevelt's New Deal, and BigGovernment. The films remains even-handed though, never passingjudgment on the central figure's morality or lack thereof (thoughDillinger himself is a little too often referred to as "nice" despitesome proofs to the contrary). Purvis is not necessarily portrayed as anElliott Ness-like paragon of morality either, he's no arbiter of allthat's just and good, he's just a man on a mission -- to avenge theKansas City massacre in which several FBI agents perished at the handsof gangsters. DILLINGER is almost documentary-like in this way; theviewer is presented with the facts (however fictionalized for creativepurposes) and it's up to him to make up his mind, though I'll admit Ifound myself rooting for Dillinger and his gang during the shootouts(is the failing on my part or Milius's?) Like all bank-robbery films, the movie tends to be somewhat shapeless,events happen in an elliptical fashion to mark the span of time betweenhits and the tension in-between what is basically a succession ofset-pieces, is relieved by quiet interludes of the wild bunch enjoyingthe fruits of their labor in the peaceful countryside. Another problem with the film is that, Harry Dean Stanton apart, noneof Dillinger's partners in crime fully register with personalities oftheir own, not even -- most egregiously -- Richard Dreyfus's "Babyface"Nelson.Ben Johnson, as tough, stone-faced FBI Agent Purvis, brings the coolveteran assurance of a man biding his time to his role. If anything,Johnson makes Purvis too tough, almost invulnerable -- never onceletting a crack in his armor show -- that it's hard to believe thatsuch a man would later in life commit suicide with the gun he used onDillinger.Michelle Phillips, in her debut, does a creditable job as a half-breedformer prostitute turned Dillinger's girlfriend and her attachment anddevotion to her man is never less than credible, bringing a certainkind of poignancy to her scenes with Oates. Aesthetically, the film's compositions are pleasant (if a tad tootight-cropped) and take full advantage of the barren, scorched earthlandscapes of Depression-era little towns. The archival footage,newspaper clippings, and (older) movie clips interspersed in thenarrative gives the film its of-the-era feel and further itsnewsreel-like quality. As for the violent action sequences, they arethe highlights really, staged Old West style a la Peckinpah, fast andfurious bouts of carnage, mayhem, and death punctuated by the mightyroar of Tommy guns.DILLINGER may, in the end, be too narrow in scope to fully do justiceto as fascinating a figure as its eponymous anti-hero. Nevertheless, itis a very watchable actioner a la Joseph H. Lewis's "DEADLY IS THEFEMALE" (a.k.a. "GUN CRAZY") or the FBI STORY and true crime story fansshould give it a try AFTER having seen such gangster classics as LITTLECAESAR, SCARFACE - SHAME OF A NATION, PUBLIC ENEMY N.1, WHITE HEAT,etc...

louis schiappa

09 May 2012

Machine guns ablaze

Underrated gangster film. No Bonnie & Clyde here but solid cast in goodlooking fast paced action packed machine gun blazing shoot-em up. Oates isperfect as John Dillinger and Johnson plays a ruthless tough as nails Pervuson his trail. Richard Dreyfuss highlights the supporting cast as the punkBaby Face Nelson. Milius direction style is a combination of Penn andPeckinpah with his fast moving exciting bloody gun battles.