It is currently Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:25 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




 Page 1 of 2 [ 27 posts ]  Go to page
1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:18 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:43 pm
Posts: 10376
Location: Austin
Compare the movie and the book. Did you like the way Mann told the story?



_________________________________________________________
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -
Wow! What a ride!
Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:50 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 9:01 pm
Posts: 58815
Location: Riding shotgun with Dillinger
I prefer the devotion to Billie in the movie. :smiliewithhearts: :cloud9:



_________________________________________________________
I'm cooler online-Brad Paisley
Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:57 pm 
JDZ Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:13 pm
Posts: 12379
Location: The Left Coast
Hey jdfan, I'd have to agree with you on that. :cloud9:



_________________________________________________________
You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:06 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 8:15 pm
Posts: 18674
Location: near Omaha
Which book is the question. That is where my disappointment in the movie came, I think. I wanted a movie about Dillinger the Untold Story and what was on the screen was a movie about Public Enemies. Why did I think they gave it that name? :dunce:

While Dillinger was a major player and Johnny was excellent as always :smiliewithhearts: :cloud9: I went to the movie expecting it to be Dillinger's movie. It was as much Purvis's movie as Dillinger's. And Hoover, who was a huge factor in the PE book wasn't such a big part of the PE movie. Factually, the movie stayed relatively close to the truth, taking some license to keep the story more interesting and keep it moving along, while the book PE was completely about truth and accuracy.

Comparing the PE movie with our current book club selection, I thought the book gave a more balanced and sympathetic look at Dillinger while the movie made him harder and colder and meaner. In the movie, when Dillinger breaks down after Billie's capture, it seemed out of character; if we had the background information that is presented in The Untold Story about the earlier losses in his life, that scene would have been much more touching :bawl: and understandable. Not that Johnny didn't play it well -- didn't we all want to hand him a hankie through the screen? -- but the movie character didn't have much deppth to his human side.

JMHO


Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:12 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:28 pm
Posts: 3907
Location: Florida
Well I have refrained from posting on the thread discussing the film because I don't want drummed off the zone. As you might suspect I am one of those sticklers for facts and having went to the trouble of reading PE and this book plus several others of Hoover and the gang members I really hate seeing so many non readers taking this film for true. Obviously I prefer the book.

Before I get the rotten tomatoes let me tell you I enjoyed the scenes with Johnny and Billie as much as the rest of you. I just thought since Mann went to the trouble of using the real locations he would stick to the facts. I don't buy that it makes the film better to change when people died when the real story is just as good or better.

As jdfan said she prefers the devotion to Billy in the movie. I do too, because its true, but he also loved other women and I don't think it should have been a big secret. Other than the wrong photo in the locket and the message to Billy that never happened, I like the portrayal of Dillinger and Billie in the film.

My biggest gripe was all the Public enemies killed when it didn't happen that way. Most of them really died AFTER Dillinger, not before. Pretty Boy Floyd ,Baby Face Nelson, and Homer Van Meter among others.

Second was including Dillinger in the scene of the great prison break when he wasn't there. He threw the guns to them a month before the break and by then he had already been arrested in Mary Longnacres apt. in Ohio. They left out the much more interesting true prison break where the gang broke Dillinger out of jail.

I also think they should have mentioned the plastic surgery he and Van Meter had so they could try to start over. The fact that they discussed the surgery when he was with Billy shows he wanted to change and he was truly upset when she was arrested.

I think Mann wanted to make a love story and he did. He could have showed Dillingers love for Bille and still told a true story of his life. A also agree he wanted to give equal time to the FBI because the PE book did. Mann just enhanced Pervis a bit to do it. I also think it wasn't clear in the film that the FBI shot up innocent men in the car leaving Little Bohemia. They were too busy making a gunfight where Hamilton is shot that didn't happen there.

Nebraska I agree with all you said about the way Dillinger was portrayed in the film vs the book.


Last edited by gemini on Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.


_________________________________________________________
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers

Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.
Offline
 Profile WWW  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:19 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:48 am
Posts: 1048
Location: in the shade
Well, I agree that Dillinger is portrayed with a harder exterior than found in the book.



_________________________________________________________
I'm not a brand, I'm more of a variety. - Johnny Depp
Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:28 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 8:15 pm
Posts: 18674
Location: near Omaha
gemini wrote:
Well I have refrained from posting on the thread discussing the film because I don't want drummed off the zone. As you might suspect I am one of those sticklers for facts and having went to the trouble of reading PE and this book plus several others of Hoover and the gang members I really hate seeing so many non readers taking this film for true. Obviously I prefer the book.


I don't think anyone will get drummed off the zone for expressing their opinion and there were certainly a lot of disappointed fans posting on that thread. And here at ONBC, there are no wrong answers!

I agree that it seemed odd Mann went to so much trouble to shoot in the "real" places, (restoring the Crown Point jail was a major construction job, as I understand it) and then didn't stick closer to the facts. People who weren't somewhat schooled in the Dillinger/Hoover/Purvis story were probably completely lost. The magnitude of the Little Bohemia disaster, for instance, must have escaped viewers who weren't familiar with the story and didn't quite catch it that there were innocent men shot in the car outside the inn.

Some will take the movie as "truth" when in fact, a lot of things were portrayed inaccurately. But as movies go, I think this one took fewer liberties with the truth than many. Finding Neverland comes to mind. But that doesn't make it a good thing.

Maybe a part of the problem was trying to fit such a big subject into one movie. In trying to do it all, maybe it became fragmented.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:28 pm
Posts: 3907
Location: Florida
nebraska wrote:
gemini wrote:
Well I have refrained from posting on the thread discussing the film because I don't want drummed off the zone. As you might suspect I am one of those sticklers for facts and having went to the trouble of reading PE and this book plus several others of Hoover and the gang members I really hate seeing so many non readers taking this film for true. Obviously I prefer the book.


I don't think anyone will get drummed off the zone for expressing their opinion and there were certainly a lot of disappointed fans posting on that thread. And here at ONBC, there are no wrong answers!

I agree that it seemed odd Mann went to so much trouble to shoot in the "real" places, (restoring the Crown Point jail was a major construction job, as I understand it) and then didn't stick closer to the facts. People who weren't somewhat schooled in the Dillinger/Hoover/Purvis story were probably completely lost. The magnitude of the Little Bohemia disaster, for instance, must have escaped viewers who weren't familiar with the story and didn't quite catch it that there were innocent men shot in the car outside the inn.

Some will take the movie as "truth" when in fact, a lot of things were portrayed inaccurately. But as movies go, I think this one took fewer liberties with the truth than many. Finding Neverland comes to mind. But that doesn't make it a good thing.

Maybe a part of the problem was trying to fit such a big subject into one movie. In trying to do it all, maybe it became fragmented.


Sorry, I didn't mean the "being drummed off the zone" literally, it was more sarcasm for being negative toward a Johnny film. I thought parts of the film were really good just not as a real life portrayal of Dillinger. My biggest concern is as you said, " Some will take the movie as "truth" when in fact, a lot of things were portrayed inaccurately". Unfortunately many young people get their history from movies and not books. I have no problem with the film as entertainment but not a lesson in history.



_________________________________________________________
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers

Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.
Offline
 Profile WWW  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 7:36 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:43 pm
Posts: 10376
Location: Austin
I rarely prefer a movie over a book I've read, it just isn't the same. This case is no exception. I had built up some pretty high expectations for the movie and that may have been part of my problem. My biggest problem, like many of you, were how the facts were distorted or ignored completely. The telling of what happened at Little Bohemia was especially perturbing. The whole historical significance of the raid was completely lost. No one except innocent bystanders was killed by the FBI and the movie totally glossed over the embarrassment sustained by the G-Men in that incident. gemini, the inaccurate dateline for the deaths of the other members of the gang wrankled my nerves as well. I also did not buy the ending at all because I knew it wasn't true. I felt people who were not familiar at all with the Dillinger story would have been lost as to who was who and what happened where and when. It just seemed disjointed and rushed. I guess sometimes knowing the facts makes it more difficult to like the movie. It's one thing to change a novel that is fiction but quite another (in my mind) to play fast and loose with historical fact. Having said all that...the tone of the movie, the settings, costumes, etc., were wonderful and it definitely gave you the flavor of the time period. I did appreciate the fact that he went to the historical locations. So I'll give him credit for that at least, even if he didn't stick to the facts. Sorry...it just wasn't my favorite. I will, of course, say that I did like Johnny's performance but I was looking for a little more of the humor and wit that Dillinger possessed. That may have been a directorial decision and who knows what may have landed on the cutting room floor. Marion was wonderful and totally mesmerizing in the interrogation scene. There were also some subtelties that I thought were well done, like watching Johnny as Dillinger surveying the wall of posters showing how many of his gang members had been killed. Overall I definitely preferred the books.



_________________________________________________________
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -
Wow! What a ride!
Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:11 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 8:15 pm
Posts: 18674
Location: near Omaha
I wonder how Bryan Burroughs feels about the distortions of fact. I know he said some positive things during filming, but now I wonder how he really feels. The accuracy of Public Enemies the book was so important to him.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:09 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 12:27 pm
Posts: 548
Location: Kensington, CA
I only saw the movie once. I am hoping to go one more time although I really feel a good movie "gets" you and doesn't require a second, third or ?? viewing. If done well it leaves a lingering memory. My initial impression was that the story was told with the speed and force of the bullets used. It propelled Dillinger's life to an explosive end. I agree will all regarding important info missed. Plastic surgery bit not used but quite important to overall comprehension. I,too, missed a softer interpretation of Dillinger's character. Sometimes he was so off-putting that I couldn't understand Billie's attraction or tolerance. I so agree with Nebraska about the crying scene. It also hit me as out of character because of the general mood and behavior of Dillinger in the film. As he was portrayed in the movie, somehow I don't think you would expect him to break down so heavily. It seemed surprising, whereas, in the book it made sense. It makes me wonder about Michael Mann's general impression and interpretation of Dillinger. I must also qualify myself as not being familiar, educated with Mann's work. Perhaps that's a disadvantage in evaluation. I always see these films because of Johnny...so...And, I would have liked a more developed Piquett. I enjoyed the little bit there was and really wanted more!! I may check in again after another viewing. So, at this point I liked the book more. In particular the Dillinger book. Not having any reading or educated background, my son's hit was "Well, what was that about and why did they bother to make the movie?". Though he was appreciative of Johnny's performance the overall purpose and message evaded him.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:04 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:28 pm
Posts: 3907
Location: Florida
deppaura wrote:
I only saw the movie once. I agree will all regarding important info missed. Plastic surgery bit not used but quite important to overall comprehension. ......
I,too, missed a softer interpretation of Dillinger's character. I so agree with Nebraska about the crying scene. It seemed surprising, whereas, in the book it made sense.....
I must also qualify myself as not being familiar, educated with Mann's work.........


deppaura I think you would find yourself more familiar with Mann's work than you think. He has made a lot of films. A couple of my favorites were "Heat" with Al Pacino and DiNero, and "The last of the Mohicans" with Daniel Day Lewis. Some of his recent films were Miami Vice with Colin Farrell, The Aviator with Leonardo DiCaprio as Howard Hughes. I am not trying to advertise for him but just to point out that he's made some very good films and some popular films.

I think with Public Enemies he had some great actors to work with and he didn't take advantage of it. I do mean Johnny but also he had some great character actors playing his gang and if you blinked you missed them in the film. Seeing the cast really had me looking forward to this film. Real locations are great but they don't make up for a good story. My point being that there really was a good story in the books but Mann dropped the ball.

A couple of things missing were that with all that machine gunning going on they left out how many times the gang members were shot. Hamilton was shot 3 different times with the last time being fatal.

Dillinger was shot in the shoulder in one of the same robberies Hamilton was wounded. He was also shot in the leg escaping from an apartment with Billy driving. Another great scene would have been the one where Dillinger was shot 4 times in the vest and either he or Hamilton killed Patrolman Wm. OReilly. I think it could have been done leaving the shooting possible either way leaving the audience to decide.

I really missed seeing the gang breaking him out of jail where Pierpont shoots the sheriff. Instead of these real scenes too much time was wasted with things that never happened like Dillinger thowing the guy out of the car in a getaway scene where he was not even present.


Last edited by gemini on Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:23 am, edited 1 time in total.


_________________________________________________________
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers

Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.
Offline
 Profile WWW  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:11 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 9:01 pm
Posts: 58815
Location: Riding shotgun with Dillinger
It wasn't clear at all in the movie about the innocent men shot at Little Bo. I had read it somewhere or I would have been even more confused. Also wasn't there a man who taught him all the tricks about robbing banks?



_________________________________________________________
I'm cooler online-Brad Paisley
Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:15 am 
JDZ Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:13 pm
Posts: 12379
Location: The Left Coast
gemini wrote:
Before I get the rotten tomatoes let me tell you I enjoyed the scenes with Johnny and Billie as much as the rest of you. I just thought since Mann went to the trouble of using the real locations he would stick to the facts. I don't buy that it makes the film better to change when people died when the real story is just as good or better.

I totally agree with this. He took such pains to get the location right….and I give him oodles of kudos for that. I was much appreciative in that regard. But why do that, and get the deaths of the gang wrong????? And it makes the FBI look better than they deserved. Those that didn’t know that story would think that the FBI finally came through. But in fact, the FBI didn’t come through, as it were, until they executed Dillinger.

Gemini, nebraska, deppaura (and anyone else who I might have left out here)…

What you have said has really resonated with me. I too felt that Mann’s vision of Dillinger was far from how I envisioned him (both in Dillinger: The Untold Story, but also in PE). Too hard, mean, violent. And if Mann had expanded more on his backstory, the emotion he showed when Billie was arrested wouldn’t have seemed so out of place. My 19 year old son even said that he wished he had known more of Dillinger’s background. He felt that Dillinger’s and other’s characters were not developed enough.

I sort of understand why the plastic surgery was left out. I expected it to be left out. And that is because it would have added at least a half hour to the film. On the other hand, it is very relevant to the story. I’m not sure when he entered the police station, but I’m assuming it was after his plastic surgery. And that would make more sense because he wouldn’t be noticed as easily.



_________________________________________________________
You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Dillinger Question #14 ~ Film vs. Book
PostPosted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:32 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:43 pm
Posts: 10376
Location: Austin
Quote:
Also wasn't there a man who taught him all the tricks about robbing banks?


jdfan, that was Walter Dietrich who had been a student of Herman Lamm. While in prison, Dillinger was schooled by Dietrich in the finer points of bank robbery and prison escape known as the "Lamm Method". Dietrich was one of the inmates that escaped from the penitentary with the gang but he was not killed in the escape as was portrayed in the film.



_________________________________________________________
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -
Wow! What a ride!
Offline
 Profile  
 
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 2 [ 27 posts ]  Go to page
1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


phpBB skin developed by: John Olson
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group