REVIEW: ‘Mesrine: Public Enemy # 1′

“Have you read my book?”

“Mesrine: Public Enemy # 1″ opens on the aftermath of the 1979 attack that began the first film. We quickly rush back to 1973, with the criminal being questioned by cops about his latest excursion.  Again, the sly humor of Richet’s film slips out, as Mesrine admits to robbery and attempted murder, but won’t accept charges of check forgery (“I won’t confess to stuff I didn’t do.  That’s only logical.”).  Due to a legal loophole, Mesrine must be tried in a specific court and has planned ahead.  Of all of his daring escapes and break-ins, none is quite as audacious as when he takes a judge hostage in the middle of sentencing.

The second half of the Mesrine story is a trickier one; the lead character isn’t just learning the ropes of crime and excelling, he’s now almost drunk from his success.  After writing his memoir, Mesrine frequently speaks with reporters and interviewers as if he is a bad-boy rock star, or revolutionary pop-icon.  But the cycle of his crimes and prison stays continues to ebb and flow, the rhythm broken most notably with Mesrine’s introduction to Francois Besse (a shifty-eyed Mathieu Amalric) where he carries out an intricately planned escape from a high-security prison, and then goes on the lam with Besse, at one point hijacking a family from their country home to cross a police checkpoint.  It is a harrowing sequence: we know Besse is a bit of a hothead, and the tense moments with the father of the family leave you wondering what will happen next.  Then there is Mesrine’s anarchic, revolutionary compatriot Charly Bauer (Gerald Lanvin), who, like many of his associates, is turned off by Mesrine’s constant bellowing about tearing down the system of judges and government rule, when it’s only just been about robbery, murder and celebrity.  Eventually Mesrine turns everyone away except for Sylvie Jeanjacquot (the lovely Ludivine Sagnier), his final love and partner.

That is not to say the film doesn’t have its winning moments.  Again, the Besse section is compelling for the thrill of its sheer uncertainty.  Mesrine also has what could amount to the two films’ most touching and telling scene, when he goes in disguise to see his ailing father in a hospital (“The banks were closed.  I figured I would visit.”).  It is here Mesrine takes the opportunity to tell his father that he wasn’t a very good son or father, and both men seem able to accept each other as they are, without judgment.  But quieter moments are short-lived, and soon we are back to work.

In truth, the Mesrine story makes a good comparison to two American classics: “Killer Instinct” is very close to “Goodfellas” in that it shows the growth of the criminal and the dangers that are exposed when he steps outside the boundaries of his “industry” and becomes more reckless.  On the other hand, “Public Enemy # 1″ feels more like “Scarface”: ego and desire for attention have driven the capable man into slippery territory, where ultimately the opposition gets the upper hand.

But perhaps the best comparison is to Steven Soderbergh’s recent (and similarly split) “Che”.  Both stories have first halves that are tightly controlled, richly designed, and acute in their ability to focus on the individual wrapping his arms around a cause (good or bad).  Yet they both suffer during their respective second halves from the sense they are unfocused and cluttered, and as films are not as attractive on the screen.  Perhaps the trouble is more with filmmakers’ choices of which parts of their real-life subjects’ lives to cover, and which to set aside.  Richet’s “Mesrine” is astonishingly good as a beginning, but as en ending is merely adequate.