Public Enemies at 15: Michael Mann’s End to the Wild West

Michael Mann is going through a moment of critical and cultural reassessment, at least within the increasingly niche world of cinephilia. Heat, his crime-thriller epic and definitive masterpiece, made it onto the 2022 Sight & Sound “Greatest Films of All Time” poll in a 15-way tie in the mid-100s alongside works by such arthouse darlings at Michelangelo Antonioni, Luis Buñuel, Jacques Rivette, Robert Bresson, and Alain Resnais. In the early 2010s, Mann was the butt of a recurring joke in The Trip series, where Steve Coogan wanted to be taken seriously as an actor working with auteurs, and Rob Brydon asked him if he would ever work with a more Hollywood director like Michael Mann. Now in 2024, Mann has become a figure to the extremely online and plugged in world of Film Twitter what Alfred Hitchcock and John Ford were to the Cahiers du Cinéma critics were in the 1950s: a mainstream Hollywood filmmaker who is not taken seriously enough as a towering artist because of his genre status. This renewed reverence has bled out from the online world, too, where a Twitter user named Michael Mann Facts has had the opportunity to program celebrations of Mann’s works at the Roxy Cinema in New York City for two years now. But it would be an understatement to say interest in Mann’s work is reserved for the hyper-online—just this year, the seminal study of Mann’s oeuvre by one of the leading French critics on American cinema, Jean-Baptiste Thoret, had his Michael Mann: A Contemporary Retrospective translated into English. Heat has had a much earned moment, and the maligned-at-release Miami Vice has had its poetics finally appreciated—even the shoddy (and clearly not Mann-penned) Blackhat has gained new life with a long-awaited Director’s Cut. And yet, Thoret points to what I would consider to be Mann’s most underappreciated and monumental masterpiece, Public Enemies, as being an essential point in Mann’s examination of his own cinema.
Turning 15 today, Public Enemies follows famed bank robber John Dillinger (Johnny Depp), and the struggle by Bureau of Investigation (the primordial version of the FBI) detective Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale) to hunt down public enemy number one. Thoret argues that “by focusing his story on the passage from 1933 to the summer of 1934, Mann had sought to explore the archaeology of the world in which Frank (Thief), Neil McCauley and Vincent Hanna (Heat), Ricardo and Sonny (Miami Vice) and Vincent (Collateral) would one day evolve.”
At the base of this story is an ur-crime film, one of Mann’s most mythic and romantic portrayals of cops and robbers. Depp’s Dillinger has an unbridled swagger, to the point where, in his capture, the press can’t help but find him as charismatic as his girl, Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard), does when Dillinger convinces her to quit her day job and run off with him. “I don’t know anything about you,” Frechette says against Dillinger’s advances. “I was raised on a farm in Mooresville, Indiana. My mama died when I was three, my daddy beat the hell out of me ‘cause he didn’t know no better way to raise me. I like baseball, movies, good clothes, fast cars, whiskey, and you… what else you need to know?” Dillinger’s swagger is such that, when they take a young woman hostage during a bank robbery early in the movie, she seems to start to like him while they’re running to ditch her in the woods.
Dillinger is Mann’s ultimate cool-guy robber, similar to how Purvis is Mann’s ultimate cool-headed cop: a no bullshit, thorough, boots-on-the-ground investigator who is willing to get his hands dirty when he needs to, but never at the cost of what he perceives as moral compromise. These two idealized figures are contrasted not as much by each other, but by the institutions that they are the groundwork for.
In Purvis’ case, it is the newly forming federal police force going after cross-state crime, the Bureau of Investigation led by J. Edgar Hoover (Billy Crudup), and for Dillinger it is the Syndicate, fronted by Frank Nitti (Bill Camp). Both institutions are seeking to build national networks, one of coast-to-coast bookie operations, and the other of elite national police units. Thoret is quick to point out that Hoover and Nitti are similarly meek bureaucrats who are impotent on the frontline, but all-powerful as administrators. They are two sides of the same coin, a symbiotic self-reinforcing system, not unlike how Hunter S. Thompson writes about the Hell’s Angels’ simulated war with the state of California, or Christopher Nolan frames the battle between vigilantism and terrorism in his Patriot Act era The Dark Knight (2008). The Bureau of Investigation are more than just symbolic foils, but technologic accomplices. Thoret writes that, “we are dealing with two objective allies, two faces of a single oppressive system which then seek to modernize themselves.” Indeed, the control room of switchboard wire taps and the office full of betting odds and constantly phoning accountants are mirrors of each other, trying to transform the wild world of Depression-era America into a clean collection of consolidated systems of power.