Buy Dillinger (1973) Movie. Watch online or Download
Genres: ActionCrimeDr
Starring: Harry Dean Stanton, Cloris Leachman, Geoffrey Lewis, Michelle Phillips, Roy Jenson, Richard Dreyfuss, Warren Oates
Director(s): John Milius
Country: USA
Year: 1973
Available Quality: DivX, iPod
IMDB Rating: 6.8 out of 10 (2067 votes)
After a shoot-out kills five FBI agents in Kansas City the Bureau target John Dillinger as one of the men to hunt down. Waiting for him to break Federal law they sort out several other mobsters, while Dillingers bank robbing exploits make him something of a folk hero. Escaping from jail he finds Pretty Boy Floyd and Baby Face Nelson have joined the gang and pretty soon he is Public Enemy Number One. Now the G-men really are after him.
 |
Dillinger (1973) (iPod) | Resolution: 480x272 px | Total Size: 349 Mb |
|
|
 |
Dillinger (1973) (DivX) | Resolution: 608x336 px | Total Size: 700 Mb |
|
Movie Photos:
We have taken some photos of "Dillinger (1973)". They represent actual movie quality.
Visitors Review
RONALD B. RAFF (24 May 2012)
"This could be one of the biggest day's of your life.........don't make it your last."
What makes "Dillinger" an edge of your seat actioner is Warren Oates'tongue in cheek portrayal of the legendary bank robber. Oates staggersback and forth between being likable and cold blooded, much like thereal John Dillinger. His character development is masterfully on key.The supporting cast of Richard Dreyfus, Michelle Phillips, Harry DeanStanton and Ben Johnson all play their parts to the hilt. I especiallyenjoyed Johnson's steely eyed portrayal of FBI agent Melvin Purvis.With his no nonsense attitude, he epitomizes the iron fisted stereotypeof the depression era G-Man.The rip roaring gun battles will definitely keep your attention.Director John Milius makes the most of his firearms expertise. Thelegendary shoot out at Little Bohemia displays incredible realism asthe cast is pummeled about by the heavy recoiling Browning AutomaticRifles. Automobile's and people alike are riddled with reckless abandonby the famous Tommy Guns of yesteryear. You could almost swear liveammunition is being used. The audual and visual effects are first ratein spite of the films tight budget.Another interesting aspect is the films digression into semidocumentary mode featuring the exploits of other depression gangsterslike Machine Gun Kelly. We are made aware that the Dillinger gang werenot the only ones terrorizing the Midwest.Costumes, antique cars and sets are historically accurate. The menssuits in particular are quite gaudy and accurately reflect the style ofthose days.There is never a dull moment and the movie paces itself at a rapidclip. While not a masterpiece, "Dillinger" is an accurate andentertaining retelling of the rat-a-tat-tat era.
Christopher Mercurio (24 May 2012)
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.
helpless_dancer (19 May 2012)
Gimme all the dough!
One of my all time fave actors played the gun toting thug to the hilt.Also,Ben Johnson was excellent as the obsessive detective dedicated to bringingthe hellraising criminal to justice. He did cheat a tad but got the jobdonewith no tears being shed for the hoodlum. Very good action film: I'llneverforget the huge cringe I gave when the getaway car ran over a woman anddragged her beneath it for a ways. This was Oates doing some of his bestwork.
Brian Oosterwyk (19 May 2012)
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.
Theo Robertson (18 May 2012)
Inaccurate But Still A Good Movie
Reputation is a strange thing . Take John Dillinger for example . He waspublic enemy number one during the fledgling FBI`s war against organizedcrime gangs . He was a nasty piece of work who committed the murder of aChicago policeman called O`Malley but that why he wasn`t public enemy numberone , he was public enemy number one because he robbed banks , he was aprolific bank robber during an era when banks repossessed homes andbusinesses at the merest hint of not paying back loans , many hard workinghonest American citizens found themselves destitute because of the greed ofbanks in depression hit America . To many people bank robbers at this timewere viewed as Robin Hood types ( Even though they weren`t too keen ongiving to the poor ) and there does seem to be some very slight injustice inJohn Dillinger being public enemy number one when he was far from being theworst criminal in America . Hell he wasn`t even the worst member of theDillinger gang John Milius bio pic of DILLINGER is fairly inaccurate , for example MelvinPurvis wasn`t as portrayed here middle aged but a fairly young man , butMilius is a first rate director even though he`ll always be remembered forwriting the screenplay to APOCALYPSE NOW . Despite not having a massivebudget his shoot out scenes are bloody and brutal and reminded me of therecent Ridley Scott bloodfest BLACK HAWK DOWN . He also uses a very strikingvisual style for exposition featuring a montage of newsreel , stock footage, still photos and newspaper headlines . Milius also casts well by hiringBen Johnson ( Despite being too old for the role ) , Warren Oates , HarryDean Stanton , Geoffry Lewis and Richard Dreyfuss , all fine characteractors in a fine - though rather violent - gangster film
mgtbltp (17 May 2012)
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.
Darwin Teague (17 May 2012)
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.
(17 May 2012)
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.
gary-faust (15 May 2012)
Too bad they didn't do more research.
I enjoy gangster flicks and so it's hard to give any one of them a badrating. My two biggest disappointments were 1) The totally negativedepiction of Dillinger. I think a large majority of the public likedDillinger and although a bank robber many thought highly of him.2)Purvis or "Little Mel" as many called him. In the movie Purvis wasplayed by at least 6 foot tall Ben Johnson. Running head long intodanger going places where angels fear to tread. Gimme a break. I think"Little Mel" was not only small in stature but in guts. To be fair Ithink Purvis (in real life) was an interesting character and did hisjob. Hopefully in the future he will be portrayed more realistically.It seems that John Dillinger good or bad is one of the most interestingfigures of American history and will continue to gather curiousonlookers. I can't wait for someone to do a real Dillinger film. Otherthan that I did like the film and Warren Oates in certain shots looksamazingly like Dillinger. Later
TimothyFarrell (15 May 2012)
Resembles an 40s crime flick from Monogram except with lots more violence
Warren Oates as John Dillinger? That has to be one of the most bad ass(not to mention inspired) bits of casting. While its not his bestperformance (that'd be either "Two Lane Blacktop" or "Bring Me the Headof Alfredo Garcia"), hes compulsively watchable in anything he does.The casting all around is one of the best ever assembled and all theactors turn in immensely enjoyable performances. Since this is an AIPproduction, don't expect a "Godfather" style epic of organized crime."Dillinger" resembles an 40s crime flick from Monogram except with lotsmore violence. The gun fights are alternately exciting and tedious,fortunately the direction of them is very good."Dillinger" was directed and written by John Milius. As a director, hesvery good. The film is quickly paced and the violence is exciting. Allthe performers give wonderful performances. The script is the onlyproblem. The lack of character development is a major problem, onewhich prevents this from being as good as Peckinpah. The characters areall romanticized and one-note. The dialog is over-the-top and flowery,but is generally amusing in a hard-boiled sense. If only the script hadbeen better, this could've been a great picture. Its still entertainingin its present form. (7/10)
bkoganbing (12 May 2012)
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.
xerses13 (12 May 2012)
It's not History...It's a Movie
DILLINGER (1973) is a well mounted though historically flawed filmvision of his ADVENTURES in the early 1930's. The charismatic criminal'Dillinger' (Warren Oates) with his band of merry men steal their wayto a lifestyle that the unfortunate honest people of the GreatDepression can only see on the Silver Screen. Director John Miliusconveys a view that it is better to live a glamorous (if dishonest andviolent) short life then to live like a dog in the dirt. "BETTER A DEADLION THEN A LIVE DONKEY" is the main thrust of this film.'Dillnger' has two (2) important people in his life. 'Billie' (MichellePhillips) his main squeeze and 'Purvis' (Ben Johnson) the long arm ofthe law (F.B.I). There is fine interplay between these characters andboth supply our hero with what he needs. Ms. Phillips is effective andparticularly attractive. Interesting when she was with the group 'TheMamas and the Papas' we did not think much of her. Must have been thosehorrible 1960's costumes which passed as fashion at the time. She looksvery chic in her 1930's garb. Mr. Johnson though to old for the roleperforms in his usual professional way and seems to really enjoy hiswork rubbing out the criminals.A very competent cast of character actors portray the merry men (andtheir molls). Future star playing 'Nelson' (Richard Dreyfuss) is ofparticular interest really getting into the role of that psychotic. Inone (1) scene he massacres a row of civilians to get one (1) lawofficer. At the Little Bohemia shoot out he challenges the F.B.I. with"Eat It G-Man" and a stream of .45 A.C.P. from his Thompson Sub-MachineGun Model 1921. Certainly different then 'Matt Hooper' or 'Roy Neary'.Director Milius paid careful attention to period details. Cars,Clothes, Firearms, Music with integrated period photos and clips fromold films into montage scenes supported the feeling you were in thatera. As for Historical accuracy, it is always best to go to the libraryor consult The History Station and equivalents.We saw the film when it first came out and just recently picked up theDVD. It is still very enjoyable if you take it for what it is.Interesting it's predecessor BONNIE AND CLYDE (1967) does not hold upas well and it's historical distortions are more irritating. CharacterBlanche (Estelle Parsons) needs to stop a bullet early in the film.
Wizard-8 (11 May 2012)
The direction is fine, the period detail is fine, the actors are fine, the script - well, uh...
While not without interest (such as some good action sequences), I can'thelp but be somewhat disappointed by the movie. Although it claims to be akind of biography of Dillinger, you learn very little about him. The moviestarts in the middle of his crime spree, so you don't see what lead him intothat life. And from what you see of him here, he comes across little betterthan a gun-happy thug who is into abusing his girlfriend - surely the realDillinger was more interesting than that. For that matter, you learn little (if anything) of Melvin Purvis or theother real-life figures involved here. They are all pretty bland characterswho have one role, either to pursue and eliminate evil, or escape from thelaw and rob banks. In fact, it's near impossible to tell the Dillinger gangmembers apart! The script is not just weak in giving character development, the story isalso poorly told, with the story jumping around from place to place beforewe can catch our breath and properly digest what happened. Charactersdisappear and suddenly appear, and the story often jumps months aheadwithout bothering to tell us what happened during thattime.This was Milius' first job as a director. He got the job only because A.I.P.offered him his long-dreamed goal of directing if he also wrote the script.I cannot help but think that Milius was so occupied in preparing to direct,that he didn't give himself enough time to polish his script.
kenjha (11 May 2012)
Inept Bio
This film looks at the final years of the infamous bank robber. Ineptlywritten and directed by Milius, the story has no narrative flow. It's aseries of vignettes that become repetitive and tiresome. There are alot of shootouts but the action scenes are poorly executed, with overlydramatic deaths. The acting is mostly bad. Oates seems miscast in thetitle role. Although Dillinger died at 31, Oates was 45 when this wasfilmed but looked even older. Also, he plays Dillinger as something ofa goof ball rather than a tough guy. Johnson does OK as G-Man Ellison.Oates and Johnson played brothers in the classic "The Wild Bunch," butthis will never be mistaken for a classic.
paul_johnr (10 May 2012)
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
toddrandall68 (10 May 2012)
Excellent movie but slightly flawed
I loved every actor in this film. I was even impressed by michellephillips acting. Warren Oates is one of my favorite actors, but I feltat times he was a little less than believable in the role of Dillinger.Harry Dean Stanton and Richard Dreyfuss provided some lighter moreamusing scenes (such as the time at the gas station with the old manand when "Baby Face" joined the gang. The line by Dreyfuss where hesays "I don't take orders from anyone. I got my own way of takingbanks. I go in, take the money, and kill everyone in sight" was such anexample of light "humor" in an otherwise violent and intense movie.)What frustrates me in true stories most of the time is the historicalinaccuracies. Harry Pierpont was executed by electrocution, not killedby the cops on a bridge, and "Baby Face" was killed 4 months afterDillinger. This, in no way takes away from the greatness of this film,and may have served to make the story in the film better.I have read some of the other comments to this movie and I am a littleconfused. This movie was not a documentary. I am a little frustrated byhistorical accuracies also, but that doesn't take away from the pointof a film. If this was a documentary, I would have howled at themshowing "Baby Face" or Homer Van Meter dying before John Dillinger. Butit is not a documentary but an "action packed" portrayal of a muchlarger story. If you want to draw morals or statements from this typeof film it would be a "live by the sword, die by the sword" statement.If they showed, for instance, Jesse James dying at Northfield, MN in amovie it would be historically inaccurate, but not far from the fact ofhim eventually being killed in part of a much larger violentatmosphere.If you want historical accuracy, read a book, or more "exciting"primary documents, if you want a sense of the violent atmosphere of the"public enemy era" in a short time (while eating popcorn even) watch amovie like "Dillinger."Stories I have heard about the shootout in Mason City, Iowa by theDillinger gang, and the shootout outside of Des Moines, Iowa by theClyde Barrow gang have served to make me obsessed with these storiessince I grew up in Central Iowa.I recommend both "Dillinger," and "Bonnie and Clyde" because they areboth great movies about Depression era outlaw gang life (AKA "publicenemy era.") If you had to choose only one I would pick "Dillinger" asthe most believable and intense, and "Bonnie and Clyde" for the acting,although stilted action (Warren Beatty plays an awesome Clyde Barrow.)"Bonnie and Clyde" is more of a love story then the an "action packed"gang story of "Dillinger," hence the more contrived action scenes ofthe former.
joseph rinando (10 May 2012)
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.
mw1561 (10 May 2012)
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.
ruinously (09 May 2012)
Entertaining yarn that is way too long. (Obvious spoilers)
I liked this movie. It's subject matter, the life and death of JohnDillinger, has always interested me. It was nice seeing the stories Ihave read about him be brought to life by a very skilled ensemble cast.The setting is well displayed, especially Dillinger's Ford motorcar andthe Thompson submachine guns.Unfortunately, there are two flagrant errors in this film. The first isway to much dramatic license was taken, and it did not improve uponwhat really went down. The second is the fact that it never justifiesit's running time and would have come off much better if they hadtrimmed some scenes and not included others at all.Those two beefs aren't enough to stop me from recommending it to fansof the Dillinger story, as it does have it's moments. EspeciallyDillinger's escape from Crown Point and the final five minutes at theChicago movie theater where John met his fate.
Robert J. Maxwell (09 May 2012)
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.
Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20