"Public Enemy" on DVD

[Brian Milliken]

I never saw "Public Enemy" at the Cinema, I was curious to hear how it sounded in the comfort of my own home, without the expectation that a visit to the Cinema brings, I was in disbelief at some of the dialogue, my main thoughts were what a waste of a Movie to have dozens of lines lost.....

As posted before some very strange choices.

Kindest Regards

Brian

[jason porter]

I remember reading earlier posts about the sound on this movie.  I recently watched it on an airplane and thought it was fine (with my Shure in-ear monitors)

[studiomprd]

I turned on the captioning on my DVD...

still didn't like it!

[Chris R]

I watched it for the first time the other day

and while not being quite as bad as I expected, the sudden volume changes

throughout the movie were quite surprising.

The interesting thing to me was reading the article way back about

how Mann wanted certain letters in a word to be louder to emphasize

an emotion in the delivery.

Hearing the execution of that was way off. Of course a volume change

doesn't change the inflection in the voice so it just came off as an abrupt

oddness to the sound track. Kind of like someone playing with a volume knob

on a radio.

I will say the gun battles were fantastic sounding, better than most movies.

[Bondelev]

I reviewed it on my blog. (Link in signature.) It sounded awful (sorry  to the pros who worked on it), looked worse (and I watched a BluRay), and was a complete mess as a film.

[JDirckze]

I knew nothing about the controversy of this movie until now... I'm going to have to see it though, just to see what all the fuss is about.

Last movie I watched was Zombieland. Loved it!

[John Blankenship]

My reaction to the film was similar to many here.  The production design and attention to detail were awesome -- it's a shame we couldn't see it well and enjoy it to its fullest.

Whereas "Collateral" was well served by filming in digital, this movie wasn't.

Yes, the gunshots were extremely well done, but to me the mix came across as if it were a rough temp mix.  Mumbling actors and poorly mixed dialog is a deadly combination if your intent is not to have the viewer yanked out of any immersion in the story, wondering what the heck in going on and why a studio would release something this poorly done.

Although the underlying story is compelling, I didn't like the way it was told, I didn't like the camera movement, I didn't like the sound mix and I kept waiting for Christian Bale to lose it and go off on a rant against someone.  Instead, he just whispered his way through another role.  Whispering makes you sound more dramatic, don't cha know.

Perhaps we shouldn't be too harsh.  Mr. Mann has long since proven himself as a compelling cinema voice and the fact that he's trying new artistic approaches is commendable.  Sometimes to learn what works one needs to learn what doesn't work -- this movie, for example.

John B.

[studiomprd]

" Whereas "Collateral" was well served by filming in digital, this movie wasn't. "

I don't blame the "digital", I blame the lighting, it was too dark, hard to see, hard to watch,and that must also be considered an artistic choice that was made...

[RPSharman]

There was very little I liked about the film, but SMM brings up one of my biggest problems, I couldn't see anything.  It was either too dark or the camera was too blocked.  I found myself in the theatre wanting to yell to the foreground people to get out of the way, or yell at the operator to move a little.  I do the same, oddly enough, when watching my monitors at work.  It bugs me when some kinds of weird operating are considered creative.  I just think it's odd.

[Guest Ken Mantlo]

Watched it last night on DVD.  I couldn't believe so many talented people could make such a pant load.  

[John Blankenship]

" Whereas "Collateral" was well served by filming in digital, this movie wasn't. "

I don't blame the "digital", I blame the lighting, it was too dark, hard to see, hard to watch,and that must also be considered an artistic choice that was made...

I understand (and agree) about the lighting, but my point was that I believe the richness of the production design would be much better served by shooting it on film.

The point Mr. Mann made about his choice on "Collateral" was that whereas film had rich, dense blacks, digital could "see" into those shadows.  I think digital murkiness was a decent choice for that film, but for "Public Enemies" I think forgoing film hurt what could have been a visually satisfying experience.

And, yes, I agree with your point, it should have been lit to make the most of that excellent period production design.

John B.