SportsAndLady;1608851 wrote:When was the last Johnny depp movie that didn't flop?

Public enemies?

I thought that was a flop. The Pirates sequels made a ton of money, but they weren't good IMO. His scene in 21 Jump Street was very funny.

Manhattan Buckeye;1608856 wrote:I thought that was a flop. The Pirates sequels made a ton of money, but they weren't good IMO. His scene in 21 Jump Street was very funny.

Lol his scene in 21 jump street was just that- a scene.

Pirate movies, outside the first one, were not good.

Public Enemies was outstanding. It was one of Depp's greatest if not his greatest big-screen performance. Not sure why anyone would consider that film a flop. As far as Michael Mann films go, it was right there with Heat on the list of the director's finest efforts.

reclegend22;1608893 wrote:Not sure why anyone would consider that film a flop.

Because it sucked

Mohican00;1608899 wrote:Because it sucked

The movie critics certainly didn't seem to think so. Not that they are the end all, be all, but Public Enemies generally received excellent reviews. It did not suck.

I liked public enemies. There was a lot of hype which caused it to come off not as great but definitely a good flick.

Yeah, I wouldn't call it an all-time classic, unlike Heat, for example -- the script could've been a little sharper -- but overall, Public Enemies was really well done and the acting top notch. I do remember the hype being rather momentous preceding the release, but I guess I'm not sure what people were expecting. As far as the gangster genre goes, it was one of the better efforts in the last decade IMO.

While an impressive effort, though, I do agree that it missed the mark of "masterpiece" due to the somewhat ordinary dialogue throughout the movie. There weren't many memorable moments in that regard. The action scenes and cinematography were brilliantly done, however.

reclegend22;1608914 wrote:The movie critics certainly didn't seem to think so. Not that they are the end all, be all, but Public Enemies generally received excellent reviews. It did not suck.

The same critics that have it around 68% approval on RT? Hell, even the audience is at 59%. Fucking stellar for a near miss masterpiece, but at least both groups have a better grasp on what an ok movie is more than you.

But "sucks" is too strong; it was average. Michael Mann took the Miami Vice formula and applied to it 1930's depression America. Sleek, clean cars, dapper suits, regal marble floored banks in...heh, middle America during the depression.

No depth at all to the script (underdeveloped historical context - exactly how did he become this criminal mastermind at prison), that chemistry-free romance between Depp and Cotillard...fuck, the movie is structured around repeated scenes of wounded men dying as they look into the eyes of their friends.

It's an action movie shoehorned into a period piece, semi-drama aimed at teenagers and guys who thought 300 was good. I wouldn't even have a problem with you liking it, but even thinking that parts of this film were "top notch" or "brilliantly done" is absurd.

Mohican00;1608935 wrote:The same critics that have it around 68% approval on RT? Hell, even the audience is at 59%. Fucking stellar for a near miss masterpiece, but at least both groups have a better grasp on what an ok movie is more than you.

But "sucks" is too strong; it was average. Michael Mann took the Miami Vice formula and applied to it 1930's depression America. Sleek, clean cars, dapper suits, regal marble floored banks in...heh, middle America during the depression.

No depth at all to the script (underdeveloped historical context - exactly how did he become this criminal mastermind at prison), that chemistry-free romance between Depp and Cotillard...fuck, the movie is structured around repeated scenes of wounded men dying as they look into the eyes of their friends.

It's an action movie shoehorned into a period piece, semi-drama aimed at teenagers and guys who thought 300 was good. I wouldn't even have a problem with you liking it, but even thinking that parts of this film were "top notch" or "brilliantly done" is absurd.

I pointed out previously that the script was the weakest part of Public Enemies. It wasn't bad; it just wasn't memorable in that it was at times very vanilla. Though there were some good moments, the overall blandness of the script is what kept the film from classic status IMO.

The acting overall, especially Johnny Depp as Dillinger (in addition to many of the supporting roles), was in my view top notch. Roger Ebert called it one of Depp's greatest endeavors and praised him for playing the role "as fact" and not based on previous adaptations of the character. And the cinematography and score were indeed brilliantly done. Most critics agree with that point. The New York Times, for example, referred to Public Enemies as a "grave and beautiful work of art." The reviews all in all were largely very favorable.

In the end, you thought the movie sucked and I thought it did not. So there we are.

As for the historical accuracy, or inaccuracy, of the film, maybe that's where we differ. I don't care if the entire plot was fabricated and only loosely based on the life of John Dillinger. I simply find the legend of Dillinger fascinating and personally enjoyed the way Michael Mann decided he wanted the story told. It's about as straightforward as that.

Mohican00;1608899 wrote:Because it sucked

+1, I typically like Michael Mann films, but it didn't work at all for me. It was just really slow and boring.

Mohican00;1608935 wrote:The same critics that have it around 68% approval on RT? Hell, even the audience is at 59%. Fucking stellar for a near miss masterpiece, but at least both groups have a better grasp on what an ok movie is more than you.

But "sucks" is too strong; it was average. Michael Mann took the Miami Vice formula and applied to it 1930's depression America. Sleek, clean cars, dapper suits, regal marble floored banks in...heh, middle America during the depression.

No depth at all to the script (underdeveloped historical context - exactly how did he become this criminal mastermind at prison), that chemistry-free romance between Depp and Cotillard...fuck, the movie is structured around repeated scenes of wounded men dying as they look into the eyes of their friends.

It's an action movie shoehorned into a period piece, semi-drama aimed at teenagers and guys who thought 300 was good. I wouldn't even have a problem with you liking it, but even thinking that parts of this film were "top notch" or "brilliantly done" is absurd.

Jesus dude lol

It's not a masterpiece, it was an entertaining movie. I'm not going to judge it like it's up for Best Picture.

SportsAndLady;1608985 wrote:Jesus dude lol

It's not a masterpiece, it was an entertaining movie. I'm not going to judge it like it's up for Best Picture.

Didn't you say American Gangster was a 10/10?

Mohican00;1609073 wrote:Didn't you say American Gangster was a 10/10?

That is a real good movie

Mohican00;1609073 wrote:Didn't you say American Gangster was a 10/10?

Yes that movie is awesome.

Classyposter58;1609075 wrote:That is a real good movie

SportsAndLady;1609092 wrote:Yes that movie is awesome.

so it's an all-time classic? Like it should've been Godfather III?

Got my first assignments. A Million Ways to Die in The West on the 14th. Will report back in a Marty Irish manner.

Mohican00;1609098 wrote:so it's an all-time classic? Like it should've been Godfather III?

For me, yes it's an all time classic.

Godfather trilogy are good movies but they are not as high on my list as they are for others. It's nowhere near my top 20 favorite movies.

The old lady and I are about to go see The Other Woman. Maybe Kate Upton gets topless? Haha

SportsAndLady;1609197 wrote:For me, yes it's an all time classic.

Godfather trilogy are good movies but they are not as high on my list as they are for others. It's nowhere near my top 20 favorite movies.

good to know

Mohican00;1609204 wrote:good to know

It's a really good movie, mohican

SportsAndLady;1609207 wrote:It's a really good movie, mohican

I don't think it is and I've posted my thoughts on it before (which I believe got deleted during the thread merger or whatever the fuck happened that resulted in chunks of posts to go missing).

Godzilla is coming out soon, you excited for that? Seems right up your alley - I'm guessing a solid 8/10 on the S&L scale

Mohican00;1609216 wrote:I don't think it is and I've posted my thoughts on it before (which I believe got deleted during the thread merger or whatever the fuck happened that resulted in chunks of posts to go missing).

Godzilla is coming out soon, you excited for that? Seems right up your alley - I'm guessing a solid 8/10 on the S&L scale

Don't be pretentious. Godzilla actually has a good cast. What's wrong with it?

Look how mad Mohican is getting over someone's opinion of a movie?

Mohican00;1609216 wrote:I don't think it is and I've posted my thoughts on it before (which I believe got deleted during the thread merger or whatever the fuck happened that resulted in chunks of posts to go missing).

Godzilla is coming out soon, you excited for that? Seems right up your alley - I'm guessing a solid 8/10 on the S&L scale

Not my type of movie at all, but I've heard it's supposed to be pretty good so I may give it a shot.

I like American gangster, and that makes me someone who likes Godzilla? Lmao