It’s not like we didn’t see a divided take coming on Michael Mann’s latest, but the reviews that are trickling in, updated frequently over at Rotten Tomatoes, are troubling indeed.
And I have to say, when Rex Reed is one of the few champions of an artistically daring film, what is the world coming to? David Denby, for instance, has missed the boat to a certain extent, though he certainly finds much to praise. But this:
The movie is structured around repeated scenes of wounded men (agents as well as criminals) dying as they look into the eyes of their friends. Yet some of the dying men are barely known to us, and the device, though beautifully staged in each case, doesn’t have the power it should have had. The movie is emotionally neutered.
Eh, to each his own.
Comments
19 responses to “Troubling mixed reaction to ‘Enemies’ afoot”
I think the two major critic compilation sites are confused about Denby’s review. Rotten Tomatoes has given it a negative, while Metacritic has a score of 80.
Yeah, I wouldn’t call Denby’s a negative per se. Though he does have some stiff criticisms to offer.
Didn’t Peter Travers give it 4 stars? That like never happens from him.
From the trailers itself, Public Enemies seemed like a very stale movie. I currently have zero interest in the film, Mann hardly excites me at all, so I’m hoping it gets bad reviews. That way I’ll be able to defer watching it indefinitely(probably not at all), but if it gets good reviews, I’ll probably have to see it sooner or later.
If Mann hardly excites you this film is NOT for you.
I am not excited by the trailers of this movie. There is something predictable about the topic and the texture of the film (bright with heavily starched colorful costumes) that is very aseptic.
Aren’t critics just biased against Mann and his use of HD cams?
I’m very excited to view this film later this week. It’s not really very surprising that critical reaction on this film is very mixed, but I’m much more curious to see how audiences respond to this film. It’s not your typical summer blockbuster film, yet it has the star appeal that both Depp and Bale bring to it. I’m hoping this film does well at the box office, and gets good word of mouth. However, being sandwiched in between the releases of Transformers and Harry Potter, I fear it may get overlooked by many moviegoers. I think this film should have probably been released later in the year.
I’m expecting a slick and stylish period piece that follows a pretty predictable path (in narrative, rather than simply historical) terms, but does so in a reasonably engaging manner.
Though this comment from Denby freaks me out a bit:
“The movie is structured around repeated scenes of wounded men (agents as well as criminals) dying as they look into the eyes of their friends.”
Those types of scenes are rather tough to pull off without sliding into self-parody. I’m reminded of an old episode of South Park, where it appears Mr. Hankey is about to kick it, and instructs one of the other characters to come “Closer, closer”, and then whispers something really gross in his ear. I don’t want that scene coming to mind when I watch the film. Too bad about the reviews, but they might take an upswing, and end up in the 70%+ range, which’ll be good enough for me. If it doesn’t get above 60%, I may have to consider whether it’s really worth my ten bucks.
And these critics who bemoan it not being “great”, but still, based on the content of their review, suggest it’s pretty good, better fall on the side of “Fresh”/positive notices.
is ribisi in it a lot? because i thoroughly despise him.
Also, another major warning sign is if we don’t see at least a 3 1/2 star review from Ebert tomorrow.
aaron: Two scenes.
I finally saw Heat the other night and liked it quite a bit. Mann has a defined style that can turn people off, but he manages to bring quite a lot of elegance to even the most intense crime films. I don’t expect Enemies to be “warm”, but as long as it keeps up the intensity, Mann has done his job.
okay, i can be reasonable about only two scenes. thanks, kris.
Lynn: That’s a textbook example of why I think people put entirely too much stock in Metacritic. It’s a useful guide, but aesthetic opinion can’t — or at least shouldn’t — be quantified quite so specifically.
My biggest issue with Metacritic is its use of weighted averages. To me, if a critic/magazine is good enough to make it on their shortlist of 40 or so reviews, they should all be weighted equally. I hate it when an (IMO) unreliable reviewer like Stephanie Zacherek drags down a good film’s average…or props up that of a weak one.
Even with 10 spots, I can’t help but feel this won’t make the cut.
“The movie is emotionally neutered.”
Huh — you’d think Denby’s #1 film of last year would be some mawkish, manipulative, look-how-awful, break-out-the-tissues holocaust drag story like “Defiance” — oh wait…
I saw the film last night — it’s brilliant. Narrow and straightfoward — it brushes over supporting characters like they’re extras, isn’t interested in context and like Dillinger himself, it doesn’t stop to reflect. It’s just a visual powerhouse that has the ability to kick your ass and Cotillard is wonderful. It’s just not broad enough for some critics.
Ebert gave it 3 1/2 stars. Really looking forward to seeing this tomorrow.
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090629/REVIEWS/906299997