From Pacman to Public Enemies, he's had more ups and downs than most other actors of his generation. Christian Bale has careened between extreme highs and deep lows, in the view of the folks at MovieFill, and they decided that a rollercoaster was the most apt visual metaphor for his career. A reduced-size version can be seen above.

They squeeze most of his films into the chart, though they left out a few. Before his sensational role in Mary Harron's American Psycho, he was very appealing in Metroland and got good notices in Todd Haynes' Velvet Goldmine; pre-Batman Begins / The Dark Knight, he was fun to watch as a frisky villain in John Singleton's Shaft and an uptight, would-be psychiatrist in Laurel Canyon. I don't agree with every notation in the chart. Harsh Times, for example, is cited as one of his "lows," but Bale was riveting. Two notorious off-screen incidents are included, which both affected his public perception, though it seems somewhat unfair to lump those in with his films.

Still, the rollercoaster graphic provides an easy way to look back and consider the range and daring of what he's done, especially earlier in his career. Recently he's been in more big-budget productions than anything else, and next up is David O. Russell's boxing biopic The Fighter. I'd love to see him in a couple of smaller indie flicks. What are your thoughts on Christian Bale's career so far? More ups than downs?

I walked into the new film, convinced that it could never top lean, mean B-movie classics like Max Nosseck's Dillinger (1945) or Don Siegel's Baby Face Nelson (1957) in which these gangsters were initially immortalized. But it equals them, capturing some of their raw energy and allure and clocking in as a longer, but equally fast-moving and adrenaline-pumping example. Somehow Mann only manages to use the extra time for flash and spectacle, and hardly any for depth or detail, but that only helps to speed things along. Happily, he also avoids the typical origin story, and plunges right in.

Are you psyched to see Captain Jack Sparrow as a real-life gangster? Johnny Depp plays an infamous criminal in Michael Mann's Public Enemies, which opens tomorrow. But in a world where giant robots draw huge crowds, "do audiences want to see Depp as a fairly realistic, non-fantasy version of Depression-era bank robber John Dillinger?"

That's the question asked by Anne Thompson, a veteran industry analyst. She describes the movie as only "fitfully engaging ... often flat as a pancake." She says that Michael Mann's "biggest misstep here is the same as the Wachowskis with Speed Racer. His pursuit of what interests him formally may leave audiences behind." Like David Fincher's Zodiac and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and Mann's own Collateral and Miami Vice, Public Enemies was shot on high-definition video. Thompson claims: "When moviegoers watch a period film, no matter how authentically recreated, they aren't expecting it to look like this. There's something jarring about the way Public Enemies shoves us into the past."

I don't know about you, but I could use a good shove now and again. I've enjoyed Mann's last two films, and the trailers for Public Enemies have done a good job of whetting my appetite. The cast, including Christian Bale, Marion Cotillard, and Billy Crudup, looks solid. I don't have any preconception about how period films should look -- I want a good, well-told story with interesting characters. How about you? Do you have certain expectations about how films set in the past should look? Do you want to see Johnny Depp as a "fairly-realistic, non-fantasy" bank robber?

Hollywood: the only city in the world where having lunch at the right Italian cafe could net you millions of dollars. Two fledgling producers named Derek Anderson and Victor Kubicek parlayed a tip from a dining partner into a deal for the rights to the Terminator series, resulting in Terminator Salvation and a deal that entitles them to "rake in half of any profits that might come from box-office, DVD and television sales as well as all the proceeds from a new video game and other consumer products," reports the Los Angeles Times. Dreams do come true -- as long as you can talk somebody else into forking over millions of dollars to reward your moxie, good timing, and luck.

It's a fascinating story, and well worth reading for anyone interested in the business side of Hollywood -- and for anyone who wonders, "What's a producer?" In this case, newbie producers Anderson and Kubicek (who only had one credit prior to Salvation on a film that was never released) thought they had a deal in place for millions of dollars in financing from Dubai, and so made a $25 million offer on the rights to Terminator, which were available from independent producers Andrew Vajna and Mario Kassar. When the Dubai financing fell through, the duo got another "lucky break" in the form of a commitment from a Santa Barbara hedge fund. The producers then secured funding and distribution from Warner Bros. and Sony, decided on McG as director and Christian Bale as star, and the rest is history. The producing duo also controls sequel rights and reportedly have McG signed up for one sequel and Bale for two more.

The Times also details various lawsuits that have followed in their wake, so it's not all roses and champagne for Anderson and Kubicek. Still, nice work if you can get it.