Visitors Review

julesee (2012-05-24 23:55)

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.

Christopher Mercurio (2012-05-24 06:45)

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.

bkoganbing (2012-05-22 10:50)

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.

Marty Brownd (2012-05-21 18:00)

"One of the best gangster movies i've 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 !

mw1561 (2012-05-19 13:33)

a lot of machine guns

Had I one dollar for every burst of machine gun fire then I'd be a richman. The actors in this film are talented people with good resumes, butthat it the only positive comment I can make about this film. Cheap,trashy exploitation that wants us to feel sympathetic for JohnDillinger.In these types of movies I am amazed at the gall of the director. Inscene after scene Dillinger is involved in machine gun battles withpolice, and yet he is never touched. While the film might be somewhataccurate from a historical perspective, I am fairly certain that thegun battles did not take place as brazenly as the film suggests. Thereis no way that a person could stand in the open without cover, and havenumerous police officers firing at them from a close distance and notget hit. While it might make for good action scenes, it defies reality.And the was also no attempt to explain the love interest betweenDillinger and his "moll". One minute they meet, and the next she is hiswoman. Perhaps they could have shortened the gun battles and fleshedout the romantic entanglements a little.

paul_johnr (2012-05-19 02:55)

Action outdoes acting and facts in Milius gangster tale

Anyone who visited drive-ins in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, must have seena film or two by American International Pictures, a distributor thatresembled 1980s giant Cannon Films. Wherever movie-goers ventured, AIPwould be right there to supply the latest en vogue titles - in the 50scame horror movies like 'Voodoo Woman' and 'The Undead;' in the 60swere Frankie Avalon-Annette Funicello beach comedies and biker flickslike 'The Glory Stompers;' and into the 70s, AIP churned outgrindhouse-level trash like 'Cannibal Girls' and 'Sugar Hill.''Dillinger,' released in 1973, is one of the more 'highbrow' AIPefforts that capture the true spirit of drive-in film-making; it is oneof those uneven, over-the-top flicks that satisfied the masses' thirstfor entertainment, craftsmanship and common sense be damned. On thewhole, 'Dillinger' is typical for its era: entertaining and worth acouple of hours, but certainly not memorable. Heavy on action and shorton both acting and historical fact, 'Dillinger' was a fair effort byscreenwriter-director John Milius ('Magnum Force') but certainly leftroom for improvement in his extensive career.The 109-minute 'Dillinger' - epic for AIP's scope - follows the questof FBI Midwest chief Melvin Purvis, played by Academy Award winner BenJohnson. Purvis was the investigator who sought revenge for four FBIagents killed in a 1933 Kansas City ambush that helped gangster FrankNash to escape justice. At large were the men who supposedly plottedthat breakout, including expert bankrobber John Dillinger (WarrenOates), Pretty Boy Floyd (Steve Kanaly), and psychopath Baby FaceNelson (Richard Dreyfuss). Dillinger eventually joined forces withFloyd and Nelson, taking along Homer Van Meter (Harry Dean Stanton) andHarry Pierpont (Geoffrey Lewis). He also hooked up with BillieFrechette (Michelle Phillips), a prostitute of French and Indianextraction. While taking place over several months in 1933-4,'Dillinger' is basically a chase film, with Purvis's entourage lookingto run down and kill off the men wanted by J. Edgar Hoover.'Dillinger' has a documentary feel, listing dates and places whileJohnson supplies loose narrative as Purvis. Milius keeps an honestDepression look, using authentic fashion, cars, weapons, and buildings;he also sprinkles around black-and-white photography and stock footageof gangster shootouts. The film is never boring, moving at a quick, ifhaphazard, pace. The action scenes are Dillinger's strongpoint, editedcompetently by Fred Feitshans Jr in his last professional effort.Thousands of blank ammunition rounds must have been used to make thisfilm, not to mention pounds of explosives. This film is certainly notfor the squeamish, with people getting shot and dropping dead all overthe place. The violence, while gratuitous, brings some understanding ofthe mayhem that organized crime dumped on American life.This film never transcends its exploitation status, however, becausethe needed writing just isn't there. John Milius, somewhat overrated asa filmmaker, places way too much emphasis on action. The action scenes(mostly blood-filled shootouts) are impressive and comparable with anymajor crime film of its era, including 1967's 'Bonnie and Clyde.' Butwe simply don't get to know much about Dillinger and his gang membersas people; the vital relationship that develops between Dillinger andFrechette is barely touched upon, with the pair meeting in a bar duringone scene and cavorting as lovers just ten minutes afterward. MelvinPurvis also seems to wander in and out of the storyline, becoming aprominent figure only when Milius needs to keep the film fromunraveling. All too often, the film takes on a shoot-'em-up personawhen its characters could have been explored in detail.Aside from this, the picture's main crime is ignorance of historicalfact. While many say that 'Dillinger' is just a film, it's films suchas this one that create fables and make them permanent. Those withknowledge of gangster history will point out that John Dillinger wasnot the last of his ring to die, as Milius's screenplay and the film'sdocumentary style encourage us to believe. In fact, Dillinger diedbefore Baby Face Nelson and Homer Van Meter; he also was said not to becarrying a gun on the night of his death, nor did he have BillieFrechette in tow. While these inaccuracies might make for high drama,there is no reason why Milius couldn't have stayed with the facts andwritten a great story around them.Warren Oates's performance as Dillinger is quite good, although hesometimes looks unconvincing. Oates is humorous and nicely portrays howDillinger became consumed by his larger-than-life image in the Americanpress; however, we never really feel the menace he invoked in hislifetime. Ben Johnson gives some life to Purvis, suave but rather flat.Michelle Phillips brings emotion to the Billie Frechette character andit's really too bad that Milius's screenplay didn't flesh out herrelationship with Dillinger. We never learn what drew her to acold-blooded killer, other than the stereotype of an easy-going girlwho is attracted to men of danger. The supporting roles with Kanaly,Dreyfuss, Stanton, Lewis, and a briefly-appearing Cloris Leachman, areacceptable for such talent.As a piece of 1970s exploitation, 'Dillinger' appears doomed to retailbargain bins, which is exactly where I picked up MGM's DVD release for$4.99. The film is nicely presented in widescreen (a must for drive-inflicks) with subtitles in French and Spanish. Dillinger's theatricaltrailer is supplied as a lone extra. Largely forgotten except bygangster movie fans and drive-in enthusiasts, the film doesn't reallycall for much else in way of supplementary material. For fans of thegenre, it's certainly worth checking out.** out of 4Roving Reviewer - www.geocities.com/paul_johnr

Michael O'Keefe (2012-05-17 22:13)

Fearless. Relentless. Public Enemy #1.

Director John Milius also takes writing credit for this very colorful lookat the most famous bank robber John Dillinger(Warren Oates). This storybegins in the middle of his criminal career ending in his death at theBiograph Theater. This is a very romanticized tale complete with Baby FaceNelson(Richard Dreyfuss) and Pretty Boy Floyd(Steve Kanaly). Ben Johnsonplays FBI agent Melvin Purvis who has an ego to match Dillinger's. ClorisLeachman plays Anna Sage, the infamous Woman in Red. Throw in MichellePhillips as a girlfriend and Harry Dean Stanton as minion Homer Van Meterand you have the key players in this very colorful and violent movie.Liberty is taken with history for entertainment sake and besides theprofanity filled script is not the selling point...the manic gun battles getmost of the attention. The gun play is bloody and frequent; some of theroughest ever filmed. For a less colorful, but very interesting versioncheck out DILLINGER(1945)starring Lawrence Tierney.

joseph rinando (2012-05-17 05:21)

shooting in abundance!

i recently saw the dvd print on dillinger, now available from amazon.com,released by mgm home video. on amazons web page they describe the picturequality as washed out looking, too much browns etc. however i owned a 16mmprint of this title in widescreen in the 1970s. the picture quality wasthesame as the dvd. the dvd being sharper. i believe american-internationalmade this picture with this sepia tone to make it look like the 1930s. oneof their other releases a bullet for pretty boy released about the sametimehad the same look to it. the film itself is an action buffs dream cometrue.shooting in abundance, bloody shootouts throughout. john melius first filmand a true action classic, even though it glorifies dillinger asinvincable,warren oates plays it to the hilt. possibly his best performance. if youlike lots of gunplay this is your cup of tea. respectfully, yours at themovies joe rinando.

mgtbltp (2012-05-14 23:33)

Great Gangster Flick

I picked up this excellent DVD from Amazon the other day. Directed byJohn Milius, this is another great Warren Oates performance as PublicEnemy #1, John Dillinger.The film has a fantastic supporting cast with an equally great Ben "I'mgoing to smoke one of these cigars over each one of these crooks deadbodies" Johnson as G-Man Melvin Purvis in what has to be his bestperformance that I've seen (he practically steals the picture) and alsoMNIN's Geoffrey Lewis as Harry Pierpont, Harry Dean Stanton as HomerVan Meter, Richard Dryfuss as Baby Face Nelson, Steve Kanaly as PrettyBoy Floyd, Frank McRea as Reed Youngblood, Michelle Phillips as BillieFrechette, and Cloris Leachman as the "Lady in Red" The film isentertaining through out, as good or even better than Bonnie & Clyde.with a lot more action sequences and a minimal love story that doesn'ttie it down.It could have stood to be a little longer and developed the charactersa bit more, it starts in the middle of Dillengers crime spree, so wedon't really find out what drove him in that direction, but since itwas the depression its probably similar to all the wayward biographiesof the gangsters of that time period. Its a little loose with theactual facts, Harry Pierpont was actually executed by electrocution,not killed by the cops on a bridge, and "Baby Face" was killed 4 monthsafter Dillinger. But its a drama not a documentary.There is a sequence near the beginning during a getaway where a womanis brutally run over and the death scene of Baby Face Nelson is not tobe missed, the death grin on Dreyfuss' face is pretty creepy.All in all a great watch & worth it. A must for Warren Oates fans.

mlraymond (2012-05-14 14:34)

Terrific entertainment, if not totally accurate as history

This may well be the best thing Warren Oates ever did. His JohnDillinger is humorous, menacing, philosophical, and always fascinatingto watch.A great cast of supporting players adds color to theDepression bank robber's saga; especially Harry Dean Stanton as thehapless gang member Homer Van Meter, and lovely Michelle Philips asDillinger's girlfriend Billie Frechette. Ben Johnson is a powerfulpresence as Dillinger's nemesis, FBI agent Melvin Purvis, Steve Kanalystands out with his relaxed, charming portrayal of Pretty Boy Floyd,and a then unknown Richard Dreyfuss is frighteningly convincing andfunny at the same time as psychotic gangster Baby Face Nelson ( " Idon't like to be called that").The chases and gun battles are excitingly staged, but two scenes thatreally stand out for me are humorous ones. Near the beginning, bankrobber Homer Van Meter attempts unsuccessfully to impress a cranky oldman who runs a small gas station, to the great amusement of his fellowgangsters. The other scene depicts the prison escape of Dillinger andothers in the Warden's car; taking the Warden hostage, along with asurly mechanic ( " I never seen a man with such gall!") Pausing alongthe way to rob a bank, because he needs spending money, Dillingeroffers a share to both the Warden and the mechanic. The Warden lookstroubled at the idea of accepting stolen money from an escaped prisonerand notorious gangster, but the mechanic swiftly agrees to take hisshare ( " Well, I ain't no fool!"), and the Warden mutters to himselfabout the Depression conditions before accepting the money. Biddingthem a cordial farewell, Dillinger drives off in the stolen car, as themechanic repeats his comment about never having met a man with suchgall, and wonders if Dillinger will succeed in his escape. The Wardensmiles and says " I hope he does!" This may never have happened inreality, but it makes for wonderful entertainment.It's hard to explain the appeal of this movie, except that Dillinger aswritten and played is such a likable character, that you can't helprooting for him. From what I've read, the real Dillinger was describedas being very personable and friendly, even by his victims, so Oates'portrayal would appear to be fairly close to the real thing.You get the feeling that everyone involved in the making of thispicture really enjoyed themselves, and that feeling carries over to theaudience. It is simply fun to watch, especially for viewers who loveold gangster movies. Highly recommended.

(2012-05-08 15:48)

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.

Darwin Teague (2012-05-08 11:09)

Not historically incorrect, hysterically incorrect

I just finished reading a book about Dillinger. This movie was horriblyinaccurate. It's like they got a list of names and just made everythingup. His robberies and getaways were well planned, down to the second -when the time was up, they left whether they had all of the money ornot. They had notes of every road, where to turn, etc. Purvis never sawhim at the restaurant, he was told that Dillinger paid for his mealafter Dillinger left. Purvis never even SAW Dillinger before the nightDillinger was killed, only photos of him. The way his gang members diedwere fictitious. Dillinger never robbed a bank by himself, like he didin this movie. If I had never read the book, maybe I could have enjoyedthe movie. The acting was a bit over the top in places. The action wasoverdone as well. On second thought, I doubt if I would have enjoyed itmuch even if I HADN'T read the book.

(2012-05-06 16:55)

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.

fedor8 (2012-05-06 01:30)

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.

(2012-05-05 12:57)

An exciting action movie

This is one of the best action movies ever made. Warren Oates is perfect inthe role of Dilinger and the film's rough, violent and fast-paced actionsequences remind me of Walter Hill and Peckinpah. A very goodentertainment.

Robert J. Maxwell (2012-05-04 19:24)

Exciting Trash.

Near the beginning, after it's been established that outlaw JohnDillinger (Warren Oates), is an egomaniacal rapist, another bandit ofthe 1930s is cornered in a farm house and surrounded by the FBI.Second-in-command Melvin Purvis (Ben Johnson), surveys the situations,sticks a lighted cigar in his mouth, picks up two loaded .45-caliberautomatics, and stalks off into the distant house alone. Bang, bang,bang. Purvis emerges alone from the house, carrying the female hostage,the miscreant dead. All in long shot.If you're enthralled by stories like Red Riding Hood, this should haveconsiderable appeal.Oh, it's as exciting as it is mindless. Pretty Boy Floyd meets hisdemise dramatically. Multiple violations of the civic code. Plenty ofshoot outs with Tommy guns and pistols. Blood all over.As history, it stinks. Few remember Melvin Purvis as an FBI hero,partly, I would guess, because of his name. Melvin PURVIS? We allremember J. Edgar Hoover, who fired Melvin Purvis because he was arival in the quest for public attention though.The picture was written and directed by John Milius. He's the guy whohad it written into his contract that, should any animals be shot andkilled in the course of one of his productions, he should be thedesignated shooter. Milius is the guy, a compleat gun freak, who hadTeddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders in the Spanish-American war shoutingquotations from Henry V -- "Saint Crispin's Day" and all that.Exciting, yes, and complete garbage. "I knew I'd never take him alive,and I didn't try too hard neither." That is, kill 'em all and let Godsort them out.You'll just love it.

E_D_N (2012-04-29 20:40)

A relentless account of one man's 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...

Lechuguilla (2012-04-29 15:23)

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.

Brian Oosterwyk (2012-04-29 07:01)

Goes against most conventions of good movie making...

Proof why Hollywood conventions are in place. Stale dialogue,underdevelopedand flat characters and a disjointed storyline are only part of theproblemswith this gangster classic wannabe. An attempt to be daring and differentbut this appears to be a slap-together attempt at recreating the magic ofArthur Penn 's Bonnie and Clyde (1967) and George Roy Hill 's ButchCassidyand the Sundance Kid (1969)- truly innovative filmmakers and films - butfalling well below the bar. Problems with storylines beingself-explanatoryresult in the need for a voiceover to explain problem sections. Theeditingappears again to be an attempt to duplicate the previous classics but isoccasionally disjointed and cause more problems for me technically.Unnecessary shots are thrown in to justify the filming of them but wouldhave better served the viewer by sitting on the cutting room floor.Stills,black & white montages and period music are thrown in from time to time inattempts to either be different or to cover up for scenes that can'ttransition well or to replace scenes that just didn't work at all andagainare reminiscent of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969).Overly dramatic pauses between sentences, random shots of surroundingscenery that wasn't needed for storytelling plus over-the-top acting ofbitplayers and supporting actors was reminiscent of the backyard camcorderdirectors of the late 1980's - I was left wondering who was in charge ofthis film during production and during post-production. The playing ofmusicin most two shots and close-ups and then suddenly stopping in wide shotsoverly emphasized a weak musical score. No sound editing was drasticallyapparent as the bulk of the film was gunshots, doors, footsteps anddialogue(a style used in the late 60's through the mid-70's by new directors) butlacking background noise causing it to seem artificial - particularly thetire squeaks on dirt roads. In my honest opinion the biggest problem ofallis there are no 'likeable' characters for the audience to route for norwerewe lead to see as the protagonists of the story. Neither the gangsters northe lawmen were characters I wanted to see win and neither were focused onas the 'hero'- a necessity for any story to work for me. We know fromPenn'sand Hill's movies who the 'heroes' are. Even though they are criminals, welike them and want to see them get away. I could care less who was on thescreen in this film. I got the impression that John Milius was trying togive off a non-historically accurate reenactment documentary of the eventssurrounding John Dillenger's life from June 1933 to July 1934 (hisdeath).To be fair, there are some moments of good solid storytelling, which aremoments that shine forth brightly from the dark and dismal canister inwhichthis film sits. John Milius gets better thankfully in future films wherehedoesn't seem to try to 'copy' other filmmakers. Dillinger (1973) isn't atotal waste as many stars and famous faces who were at the cusp ofbreakingout are involved with this directorial 'big budget' debut, but wait for iton a classic movie channel rather than spending money to rent or buy.

beatlemania909 (2012-04-28 15:02)

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.