Okay, so Michael Mann made Heat, which would take a lot more than Public Enemies, crappy though it was, to undo. Add in all of his other delights like Collateral, and I am naturally very interested in what Michael Mann does next, though it comes with the slightest bit of trepidation when one possibility is another Chicago gangster film.
The latest Mann news comes from two stories, one from the LA Times that focuses on his new show Luck, and another from Deadline that drops the details known about Agincourt, one of his potential feature projects. The LA Times piece is a great read and goes in to depth about Mann’s work on the HBO show that, like Marty with Boardwalk Empire (new episode review up soon!), he will be directing the pilot and executive producing the whole series. His plans are to hop quickly back into theatrical filmmaking though, and therein lies the question- what film will he be making?
Agincourt, which tells the story of the events leading up to the famous battle between France and England in the 1400s, is the most likely contender it seems. Based on the book by Bernard Cromwell, it would tell the story through the eyes of a young archer who is saved from his death sentence by the king because of his talents. The archer goes on to save a young woman from a priest and to participate in the battle itself. The other possible project, Big Tuna, is a mob story about Tony Accardo who spent 30 years leading the Chicago “Outfit.” During a portion of that time he stepped aside and let day-to-day operations fall to Sam Giancana, who eventually started living too lavish of a lifestyle– things didn’t work out so hot for him, let’s say.
Whatever Mann ends up doing, I hope he’ll scale back his need for edgy filmmaking tools and looks, and focus on telling a good story well. There’s been too much focus on his digital filmmaking (the case for which was not helped by the ugly, amateurish look and sound of Public Enemies) and not enough on the sort of rock-solid filmmaking that made the famous shoot-out in Heat so goddamn classic. I don’t give a fuck what camera captures Mann’s next project, I care if the script is solid and the style is appropriately finished-feeling. Just give me that, and whatever he lines up will be, for me, among the most anticipated of that year.
Luck doesn’t hit TV screens until next year, but it sounds like a great project, so expect more coverage as details emerge.





13 comments
I still think his best film is The Insider. Why does no one ever bring that up?
The Insider is by and far his best film, and my personal favorite movie ever. Needs way way way more love…
What's wrong with "Public Enemies?"
Marv, I swear to Christ ever critic that says it's a bad film NEVER backs it up with solid arguments, it's always that it 'looks like video' or something silly like that. Sure it looks like video, he shot it on video. And honestly, I dug it. I had never seen a period piece shot on video before, and it felt (for lack of a better word) REAL. It felt like you were a participant. Sure, that doesn't make much sense since there weren't video cameras then, but to ME, it worked. I really think that Public Enemies is measured up solely to his previous work. If a no-name director had made it, critics would have jocked the hell out of it.
ANYWAY, I have loved every single movie Michael Mann has made, and WHATEVER he does next, I will see opening day. I've been a huge Mann kick lately incidentally, I watched Manhunter, Mohicans, and Thief over the weekend, for the 500th time each. Thief is so goddamn underrated.
If only I had linked to 1200 words explaining EXACTLY why I think Public Enemies is no good…
There is a difference between reasons backing it up and no good reasons. Due respect, they should not have let you review PUBLIC ENEMIES.
I liked Miami Vice. I can watch thw first 2 acts of Collateral over and over. I have no interest in any of the project mentioned there. Big Tuna will most likely be it and will get released against The Winter Hill Gang. Both will be mediocre. So sayeth my magic 8 ball which is in fact…crack.
I completely agree; Public Enemies is one of my favorites of Mann's films, and one of the most experimental — it's not just shot on video; he intentionally does things that you can ONLY do on video. That the movie itself constantly references gangster films — and how much they affect the public perception — not to mention showing an on-screen transition from video to film in the Junior G-men ad – I think shooting in video and embracing it's limitations goes beyond making a pure stylistic statement.
Ha! Whenever you read "due respect" you know you're in for anything but.
You people defending PUBLIC ENEMIES looking like a Vivid Video production are fucking hilarious.
I didn't love Public Enemies. I didn't hate it either. What I liked about it was the look. The style lent it some authenticity. I think we're trained to expect perfect film, and shy away from digital 'cause it has different lighting requirements and different focus fields.
Overall, this guy's right. What comes first must be story. Story story story. Everything else is meant to broadcast the story.
What happened to the production of Frankie Machine?
I actually thought Renn was spot on in his review. Most especially, the poor quality of the digital video at times. I had the same problem with Collateral, which is why I can't watch it, despite how good the script is, and why I never bothered with Miami Vice. I'm a purist. Video is for independent filmakers who are paying their dues and proving their chops. And television. Just feels cheap.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.