WATCH NOW
Sometimes it feels as if the creative tank in Hollywood is empty, am I wrong? Every year, we see a new release of numerous remakes and sequels. Hollywood has so much more potential and can do far better than just focusing on sequels of the supper hit films or remakes of celluloid disasters. The world is exhausted of good films which are yet to be made. The number of unmade movies can be described as infinite. To put it in a more relevant context, there are 7 billion people on the planet and each one of them has or can follow a unique story. Of course, not everyone would have a box office-worthy story. For example, if a film was ever made about my life, it would probably earn an NC17 and get banned from overseas. Nevertheless, there are still countless people who have engaging life stories that would make for captivating films.
And for these potential movies, there is an upside for Hollywood producers: Even if the original participants of the events don’t authorize it, there are a multitude of cases where it is not necessary to obtain their authority in the first place. I will give you two examples. When Amy Fisher became a household name, there was more than one entrepreneurial producer who stared at the dollar signs, and a grand total of three made for TV movies were produced out of the scandal – and I am quite sure that Amy Fisher herself did not authorize all three movies. Years afterwards, there was the movie The Queen whose subject was worried about Queen Elizabeth and the British PM Blair. I suppose Blair and Elizabeth did not approve to be impersonated in the movie, and I also tend to think that they knew that suing would be an extremely inconvenient process that they would most probably lose.
I guess I really have come to feel that there have not been that many biopics made (for television or cinema) dealing with living persons who did not give necessary clearances prior to production. And, it appears that in most cases the producers cover their backs and pay off the subjects of their films “winking” at signed agreements. So, the answer seems to be that so long as you are a bona fide public person, like the Queen, most likely the producers would do whatever they want to you without breaking the law. It’s not entirely risk free so perhaps it’s not so astonishing that the overwhelming majority of biopics made have been about people who are not among the living any more. Such people are more often than not in the public domain which enables the film makers to portray them in a manner that does not matter whether it is accurate or not. One can see this in the film Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story done in 1993.
After the movie was released, I came across a letter written to critic, Roger Ebert, of the movie. The letter was from someone who claimed to be a Bruce Lee scholar and criticized the movie for having a fictional depiction of the martial artist’s life. Ebert’s response was sarcastic as he felt that readers have to bear such creativity when it comes to biopics, and if someone wants facts, they should resort to books. To some degree I do have sympathy for this way of thinking. Bruce Lee lived a life full of intense dedication to his craft which, let’s be honest, would seem incredibly dull if there had to be a movie made of someone as fascinating as him.
Undeniably, drawing the long deceased influences has its advantages and liberty for movie makers and sometimes, these liberties can get too out of hand to the point that it bears no resemblance to the honest truth of the people being portrayed, which is incidentally the case for The Dillinger And Capone Movie. The movie chillingly captures the life of one the most notorious criminals of America from the 1930s, the bank robber John Dillinger and mobster al Capone. But there seems to be some information that needs further assessment as there is no concrete evidence to support that the two men ever crossed paths. Interestingly enough, they appear to meet in the movie. To my surprise, this historical alteration felt more feasible than many other histories films I have watched in the past. Another thing that attracted me to the movie was that it was written by Drumian who wrote the excellent Cheyenne Warrior and wrote and directed the effective horror movie The Doorway.
Druxman’s screenplay DILLINGER is inspired by the theory propagated by some scholars that John Dillinger was not executed by the F.B.I. as stated outside of a Chicago theater on July 22, 1934. In fact, Dillinger’s brother who had been hiding was shot dead. With the notion that they have captured or killed Dillinger, F.B.I pursuers make John Sheen’s life easy as he gets to slip away and start his real life. Throughout rests of the 6 years of what one assumed was a perfect life for Dillinger in which he married a widow with a teenage son, he was sought after. So, he thought his wrongdoings were behind him. It is shocked for Dillinger however when a few of his past associates find out that he is alive. The former gangster look to him for help. Al Capone, who is now out of the jail, has a dilemma where he has untouchable dollars in a hotel under gangster control. In the effort of rescuing his currency, he hires with the help of Dillinger. To ensure that there will be no excuses, he captures his wife and puts her in one of the rooms.
Now it is Dillinger who needs to stage the bank heist bigger than any other and get his family out of Capone’s grasp along with his minions.
With audience members getting their hands on a period movie with real life characters, one of the very first questions which is posed before getting into the film is how accurate is the movie in regards to the people featured, the period detailing, and the events which actually took place. Although, as you have seen in the previous paragraph, the movie is mostly a ‘what if’ story, there is an additional plot element to be revealed which Druxman vividly spends time describing. Nonetheless, the screenwriter: Drumian definitely undertook some investigation on Dillinger and Capone and some actual facts of the two are indeed featured in the movie. This includes any where from a woman dipping a handkerchief into the blood of the supposed John Dillinger after his supposed shooting at the Biograph, to Capone in his 1940s years is revealed to be insane due to the syphilis infection. I also enjoyed the movie for other reasons, particularly, since, as a consequence, the fictitious elements of the tale became far more believable. A voice which seems to be knowledgeable is more credible. Prior to discussing areas of the movie which concern details not given by the screenplay, it is pertinent to point out that this movie was a Roger Corman production.
If you have read my earlier statement, I am almost certain that many of you reading this are rolling your eyes, recalling how cheap and elegantly tacky a considerable number of Corman films appearing in the mid 90s were. But the movie is visually, for the most part, a pleasant surprise. The production did manage to shoot a decent portion of the movie in situ, which include Al Capone-era churches, hotels, cafes etc. There are some places that were evidently built and/or period set-dressed by the production such as Capone’s ‘manning’ room in the mansion, but these locations come across as rather convincing as well. The appropriate period detail is also consistent with the costumes and the automobiles that are paraded throughout. There are a couple of sequences when the seams begin to show enough to suggest the production design unit did not have access to limitless finances, but when you take into account the movie’s pedigree, you will be thinking it looks rather good for what must have been a rather low budget.
The nagging issue I have with the film’s attempts to be accurate is with Martin Sheen and F. Murray Abraham’s casting. It has nothing to do with their acting per se, which I will get to in due course, but with other issues. I could accept that Sheen did not resemble the mug shots of the real Dillinger which I came across when researching him and Capone; indeed, the real Dillinger had some plastic surgery done a few months prior to his assassination. Then again, the real Dillinger was thirty-seven years in 1940, Sheen was fifty-five years when he made Dillinger And Capone. Sheen looks too old for this particular role. On the other hand, Abraham has a face that somewhat resembles Capone’s but does not look bulk enough for a person who was quite massively built in real life. However, both actors do somewhat manage to compensate their unsatisfying appearances by their acting.
Sheen’s portrayal of the man who brought John Dillinger to life on screen could have easily been overdone. After all, John Dillinger was a man who lived a lavish criminal lifestyle. Sheens attempts to portray him in an ordinary light reveal the sympathy behind the character. At some point, Abraham does look like he is having difficulty bringing Capone to life but sooner or later, he hits the right mark. Now, he is not only a hostile and mentally unbalanced rival to Dillinger but also to his own first team. There are some outstanding performances by the supporting cast in this section of the film as well. The part of Capone is hilariously yet very accurately played by Steven Davies, who is accompanied by John Dillinger to ensure the planned bank robbery goes without a hitch. He improves the character of Dillinger as well, who used to be his associate, along with Jeffrey Combs, who portrays his F.B.I. agent and is feverishly pursuing Dillinger. Both actors have done a wonderful job bringing their characters to life.
Catherine Hicks (7th Heaven) does appear as Dillinger’s wife, although it’s a rather meager and rather Thankless task for the most part. Dillinger has had his very muddled bit past concealed from her and when it was brought to the fore after she was abducted, one would imagine there could have been some kind of intense stupefying altercation which was lengthy in duration between the two, but this does not occur either. Subsequently she becomes neglected and is remembered only towards the very end of the picture. You never really get an impression that Dillinger is much perturbed by the fact of her existence plus that of his stepson. Another weakly written character is Combs’ F.B.I. agent. Even if the picture opts to develop him as a further danger to Dillinger, his presence is so little and the manner he departs from the movie is so abrupt that there seems to be no point at all for his existence. This character, it has to be said, is the simplest to write out from the script as possible. Perhaps if the script was sent back to Druxman for some further tuning up, these and other script imperfections might have been dealt with, but the movie would still have suffered from one big problem, a problem that ultimately aches the afflicted and the appetite for movies. And that problem is the direction by Jon Purdy.
The film bears a serious absence of depth, thrill, and enjoyment. This is most apparent in the action scenes such as a car chase which are extremely crude and devoid of sentiment. The overzealous maskers of the film Big heist lacks excitement as well, especially when it lasts a mere couple of minutes. On a side note, the film also has a weak human side. Most of the time, we do not feel as if Dillinger’s family is at risk, or that Capone, his treacherous boss poses a threat to Dillinger. He probably does look like a decent man but that certainly does not justify the cause to assist him out of his situation. This film lacks a soul. Furthermore, some of the action scenes are quite unsophisticatedly constructed. (the start of the film where Dillinger’s brother gets killed is extremely clueless.) There are people who believe in the opposite theory, which is refreshing from time to time as different perspectives help one explore out-of-context ideas, such as what allows a film to resonate with people. I, on the other hand, absolutely believe that if someone apart from Purdy was directing Dillinger And Capone, the movie would most likely have worked in spite of the inadequacies in the script. As such, a near opportunity is wasted.
To classify this movie as bad would be an incorrect assertion as there indeed exist some positives alas, in the end, you will still be left feeling regret.
To watch more movies like (Dillinger and Capone (1995)) visit 123Movies.
Also Watch for more movies like:
