Mesrine Part 2: Public Enemy Number 1

Excellent. In comparison to the first instalment, this is a full-blooded FILM, in which technical brilliance goes hand in hand with a good story. Vincent Cassel shows us every aspect of Mesrine’s character, which make sense from the psychological point of view, unlike in the first film. His character has only properly started to develop in this instalment. The movie keeps a steady pace, sensitively altering action with the personal life of the protagonist, and also makes better use of the supporting characters. The only reason I’m not giving this a five-star rating is the fact that Mesrine was something of a dumb asshole, and no matter how good the film you make about such a guy is, it cannot reach the stars. (01/07/2009)

In terms of film quality, Public Enemy #1 is fully comparable to the first film in the series, and that is, after all, logical since the same team, starting with the director and ending with the last actor, came together once again for this. The film portrays the last ten years of the legendary French gangster Mesrine. It is as long of a time span as the first part, but due to Mesrine moving from country to country, it feels somewhat fragmented. It also seemed to me that the sequel is slightly more action-packed. Although it is a very high-quality gangster film, I cannot give it five stars for the same reason as the first one. Public Enemy #1 is longer, but that still wasn't enough to produce a worthy opponent within the ranks of the police and justice system or to significantly get to Mesrine's accomplices. Overall impression: 85%. (28/11/2009)

More or less right after the first episode ended, I watched Mesrine Part 2: Public Enemy No. 1. And it probably wasn't a happy decision. The second part of Public Enemy has the same positives as its predecessor - it is well shot and Vincent Cassel excels in it, whose masks may remind some of Al Pacino in Serpico. There are a lot of impressive scenes in the film, especially the "hunt for Mesrine" passage is very good, but there is often also plenty of boredom. Mostly in the moments when Mesrine talks about the revolution. The screenwriters seem to have tried to show us Mesrine's inner self in this film, but from my point of view they did the worst job of it they could - they made me believe even more that the man was just an ordinary conceited kid who never grew up. So I was just waiting for what I saw at the beginning of the first film to happen. Before it happened, I was alternately bored and amused, wondering what good the kidnapping of the billionaire was, and concluding that it was absolutely useless (in real life and in the film), and regretting that Police Inspector Broussard was given so little space. Then came the final stakeout. During the course of it, it became clear why it was not wise to play the films one after the other. There is nothing new (in terms of content) in that scene, and it is so, so long. Again, any kind of point was missing, and unfortunately I didn't take anything away from the shocking ending. Three stars this time - a nicely shot average. (02/07/2011)

Part one was dynamic, stylish, raw, and absolutely riveting in its austere brevity. Part two is also raw, but except for the opening escapades, it is calmer, more compact, and the atmosphere has your nerves stretched to the extreme most of the time, but it is also more descriptive (but not literal). Most importantly, we finally begin to understand Mesrine’s complex character. Together, they are two joined vessels forming one perfect four-hour whole, which in my eyes has become the new quality benchmark for evaluating crime sagas. ♫ OST score: 5/5 (29/01/2009)

Interesting opinions and attitudes, well sketched characters and an even deeper study of Mesrine than the opening volume, which was much more engaging and plot-driven. The only thing that really grips and resonates in the epilogue is the finale itself, but we know the basics of that from the second minute of the first episode. (20/10/2015)