comment #1

Amy says ...

Is this Rush of Rush and Molloy? these columnists should not be allowed to talk about films at all. Did he run out of Paris Hilton stories for his column?

comment #2

Nag says ...

This is THE film that I'm looking most forward to this summer.

This, for me, is critic-proof because it's MICHAEL MANN. I'm sold.

comment #3

lesterg says ...

Did any Boston area folks catch The Harvard Film Archive screening of Manhunter over the weekend? Due to the nightmare that is the Red Line, I missed it.

comment #4

Nag says ...

By the way---when was the last time Mann wasn't acting like a perfectionist? This is normal behaviour for this guy...

comment #5

nickc says ...

I am so pumped up and ready to see this movie it's almost a joke...I cannot wait...I bet I'll see it 3 times opening weekend...nobdoy shoots pictures like Michael F'ing Mann.

comment #6

STV says ...

This was actually in Lloyd Grove's column today--who, for what it's worth to Amy, banned Paris Hilton from his column about a year-and-a-half ago.

comment #7

bward says ...

I only wish more Directors were freakin perfectionists, maybe more films wouldn't suck!

comment #8

addison says ...

I'm a big Michael Mann fan but frankly, I'm not so interested in this film. I don't particularly like either lead actor and the tv show this is loosely based on never did anything for me. I hope it's crazy good for Mann's sake just because he has a good body of work going but it's going to take incredible raves from a variety of top notch critics that I respect for me to muster enough enthusiasm to go see this in the theater.

comment #9

Anonymous says ...

The worst thing about MIAMI VICE and Mann's last film COLLATERAL is Mann's insistence on shooting on digital. The format looks like crap (especially the Viper cam) with unrealistic skin tones. And, yes, even SUPERMAN RETURNS (using the Genesis cam) looks like shit to me. Digital just cannot replicate skin tones like film and that's where it all breaks down. It also looks way too clean. We'll see what Fincher does ZODIAC, but I think the format has a long way to go.

comment #10

cathar says ...

Perhaps it's just me, but the last 5 years or so it's become clear to me that Colin Farrell is the world's most overrated big-time actor. Okay in smaller parts (his one scene in "Veronica Guerin," for example, where he could even stick with his accent, or as the villain in "Daredevil"), but simply unable to dig into a bigger role and make it his own. Perhaps it's that his accent gets in the way, that he's not really a good enough actor to suppress amd alter it; I certainly wondered how Alexander had come to be born in Dublin (and how several of his generals seemed to come from a Dublin gay bar). So "Miami Vice" may be stand-or-fall time for Farrell, his last chance to be convincing and, even, somewhat likable as a screen personality.

The actor he most reminds me of is Albert Finney, who ever since a handful of early roles has carried with him a reputation as a drunken lout and, for at least the last 25 of those years, the physical effects of such behavior. But in no way has Albert Finney ever been believable in anything other than as a puffy-faced boozer for a long, long time, and Farrell as a Miami detective certainly seems a stretch. Russell Crowe Farrell assuredly ain't.

comment #11

oddDuck says ...

for the most part, i liked the use digital in collateral, especially when Mann went dark. at times it was spooky, at others sublime, although i will admit on occasion it was just hard to see through.

comment #12

guy steele says ...

Hey gang... Not more I can add to this... but what the heck... Mann is the Man! Now that said I am not always thrilled with some of his endings i.e. Heat & Collateral. But the Insider is pitch perfect. Mohicans is brilliant, Thief is meditive the Keep... well everyone has to have a bad film... but it's really only bad in the creature department not in the filmmaking.
While of course acting and story is important as all get out with Mann it's about the framing, set-up, lighting ect. He is our modern day Kubrick. The biggest difference is Mann is more commercial.

comment #13

Anonymous says ...

I was at Soho house last night having drinks with Lloyd Grove, and he was actually going on about this at great length (in his cups, he was) when suddenly HE REACHED DOWN HIS OWN THROAT AND TURNED HIMSELF INSIDE OUT and became his esteemed colleague, Mr. Rush.

comment #14

Anonymous says ...

I don't know any ye olde expressions like in his cups, but post production stories from hell about Michael Mann are legendary and very real -- frame fudging is him and as is parceling out work to keep everyone as confused about what the other is doing as possible to maintain mind control overone and everything -- genious at work, but inhumane, to say the least.

comment #15

Dan R% says ...

Gotta love how the anonymous posters always say something negative. How can anyone say Superman Returns looks like shit? It was one of the most vibrant films I've seen in a while.
Anyhow, on the topic of Mann - can't frickin' wait for Miami Vice. I just rewatched The Last of the Mohicans on the weekend. Forgot how great it is. It's definitely one of those films that sits with you afterwards...if I had been pressed to describe what I felt after watching it, I wouldn't have known what to say.
I'm sure Mann knows exactly what he's doing. The police/crime story seems to be his specialty, so even if it's no Heat, it'll still be worth its weight in gold.

comment #16

Anonymous says ...

Here's the rest of Marc Shmuger's quote:

Michael Mann's process is exhausting, it is intense, and some people are not up to the challenge. Either they keep up with him or they fall by the wayside. It creates some raw feelings along the way.

Read between the lines. Mann is well known in post circles to grind people into the ground.

comment #17

ArchiveGuy says ...

Sadly, I suspect MV will follow in the footsteps of "Heat" and "Collateral" in that it will find an audience with the critics but not much of one at the B.O. I'm glad there's another Mann flick to see, but it saddens me that it might only further marginalize him in the industry.

comment #18

Anonymous says ...

Uh...Collateral was a huge hit.

comment #19

Anonymous says ...

Movie stars want to work with Mann. As long as they do, he'll work.

comment #20

Anonymous says ...

Anne Thompson says "Universal has a bunch of Miami Vice screenings this week" while Shmuger bravely insisted. "It's definitely opening on time, and we'll be screening the final version all next week."

Add another half mil to rush post costs.

comment #21

PatrickD says ...

Ok, 'The Last of the Mohicans' is my Best Picture
of 1992 and 'The Insider' won that same award in
'99, but Mann can certainly make a dreafully dull
action...men doing what they do best...sort of
epics like 'Heat' and parts of 'Collateral,' but
I find the latter film to be a much stronger
experience overall. Now, 'Miami Vice' will bomb
BIG TIME! It's over! Write it down! I hope it
ddoesn't for Mr. Mann's sake, but the writing
has been on the wall for a whole year now. People
laughing at the trailers, etc. The budget? How
in the HELL would this THING cost $120-150 million?
I NEVER would've allowed it to go foward with
anything over $80 million. 'Collateral' ONLY made
money because it cost a rather low $60-65 million.
Otherwise, it would've bombed just like this thing
is going to. Secondly, Colin Farrell has been a
three-time nominee for my Best Actor award and
took the top price in 2000 for 'Tigerland' He's
anything BUT overrated. I've never seen an actor
take so much crap from Hollywood "journalists"
and critics before in my life. Brad Pitt went a
whole deacde without opening a film himself, and
I question if he should get any credit for 'Mr.
& Mrs. Smith' anyway. Mr. Farrell is a true MAN
and not one of those Hollywood pussies like Jake
G., Johnny D., and Leo! When I think of great
actors Richard Burton, Brando, Olivier, Plummer,
Hopkins, Finney, Bates, et. al. come to mind
right off the bat. I can't think of ANY young
American actor I've even CONSIDER to be even CLOSE
to ALL of the guys listed above. Crowe and Farrell
are the only ones with Mr. Ledger making a strong
case based on his 2005 efforts. If you're only
talking about money, then I'd direct you to the
over half-billion dollars that Mr. Farrell's
movies grossed in 2003, not to mention the $170
million for 'Alexander', which any filmmaker in
the world would take in a second. However, I
guess American men just can't get over Colin
being extremely hung and just about every
woman on the planet wanting him (and more than a
few men, too!) Get over it! 'Vice' will bomb, but
not due to Farrell or Foxx. The T.V. show is just
KILLING the film, esp. on the net. Look at all
the hype 'Snakes on a Plane' has!!! 'Vice' isn't
even on the same planet. Those big laughs for the
trailer was the end, just like the second trailer
for 'Alexander' really hurt it with most film
buff types.

comment #22

Mathew says ...

"And, yes, even SUPERMAN RETURNS (using the Genesis cam) looks like shit to me. Digital just cannot replicate skin tones like film and that's where it all breaks down."

While Superman Returns was far from looking like shit, I do agree with you about the skin tones. Actually it's not so much skin tones but the way HD tends to show every last blemish like one of those magnifying mirrors. You could easily see Routh's pancake make-up in the Daily Planet scenes.

With that said I'm glad Singer went with the Genesis camera over the CineAlta or shooting in Super35 which was his original plan. Super35 looks like shit to my eye when blown up. They might as well shoot on 16mm. Grainy and mushy. The Genesis on the otherhand held up really well when I saw SR in IMAX 3d. The Genesis actually records in 2K which is roughly twice the resolution of the Sony CineAlta that was used for Star Wars. The 70mm blow-up looked exceptional to my eye. The only issue I found was excessive grain in shadow areas. However it was very fine compared to film grain which can look blobby. Again however HD is almost too truthfull which is not always a good thing.

comment #23

Unlucky Farrell says ...

I kind of appreciate Farrell and he's obviosuly dedicated to his craft. In fact, his dedication to work with some iconic directors is what's led him into his quagmire of a career. He's seen as damaged goods now because his last three pictures, Alexander, New World & Ask the Dust, were for all intensive purposes flops, at least domestically. But they were all directed by legends in the business, and I doubt any working A-list actor would've turned them down. But they did in fact all get tossed aside by the public, nothing caught on, and he's had no popcorn hits to squeeze inbetween these ambitious pics. Now comes Miami Vice. Another picture with a grade A director, but saddled with an unfortunate title. Mann would've been wise to call this movie anything other than Miami Vice. It will likely do middling business, regardless of quality, and Farrell will have to take it on the chin again. For all his ambition to work with great directors, he's likely to be repaid for it by having to go slumming into mindless action pics and retarded comedies real soon, just to keep his name afloat in the business.

comment #24

Noah says ...

Hey Wells, I'll bet you'll loveeeee this:

http://perezhilton.com/boardroom/viewtopic.php?t=2637

comment #25

Anonymous says ...

"maddening post-production process -- screening the film at least once a day, then obsessively adding and subtracting dialogue, pauses and even frames, then redoing all the changes."... Grove is also hearing this process is "a desperate effort to fix the unfixable."

Of course. Everyone knows that when a film isn't working it is usually the fault of a few errant frames or a line of dialogue.

Like our esteemed host and others have said:

The man(n)'s chasing perfection.

comment #26

Greg says ...

"maddening post-production process -- screening the film at least once a day, then obsessively adding and subtracting dialogue, pauses and even frames, then redoing all the changes."... Grove is also hearing this process is "a desperate effort to fix the unfixable."

Of course. Everyone knows that when a film isn't working it is usually the fault of a few errant frames or a line of dialogue.

Like our esteemed host and others have said:

The man(n)'s chasing perfection.

comment #27

akabob says ...

Count me in with the Farrell believers. I think he's underrated and definitely takes an absurd amount of abuse from the critics, et al. I also think (hope) "Miami Vice" is gonna be another Michael Mann masterpiece. Mann got that big budget because of the "Miami Vice" name. He's gonna make the movie he wants to make, one that usually is brilliant. His only miss for me was "Ali" and even that had a golden performance, seemingly out of nowhere, from Jamie Foxx. I think (hope) when audiences see this on the big screen the laughs are gonna stop. If audiences don't show up that's their loss (& uh, Universal's). Now, I probably would have preferred a $130m feature based on "Crime Story" w/the great Dennis Farina, but "Miami Vice" looks perfect for this summer.

comment #28

gh says ...

A director who cares about the finished product? What nerve.

comment #29

Patrick says ...

For anybody who has seen 'Any Given Sunday' a few
times, Jamie Foxx's recent success is no surprise. A $130 million version of
'Crime Story' would be just as bad. There isn't
any need of a film like that costing $130 million.
These stars need to get a clue and lower their
asking prices by at least half, if not more! None
of them can open a film anymore, even Foster had
'Anna and the King' and Denzel had 'Out of Time.'

comment #30

Colin says ...

Wow, it sounds like Mann is really under the gun. I wonder if we're going to have another situation like "The New World," where the director isn't completely satsified with the version of his films that initially hits the screens? Either way, I'm looking forward to it.

comment #31

Zachary says ...

David Poland has a review of Miami Vice up.

http://www.moviecitynews.com/columnists/poland/2006/060710_review_miamivice.html

comment #32

oddDuck says ...

Not a big fan of Poland, and tend to disagree with his calls a lot of the time, but reading his review of Vice has me PSUCHED!

comment #33

Colin says ...

Interesting. So, when I combine what Wells wrote with what Poland wrote, it makes me wonder how close the version Poland saw will be to the theatrical version.

comment #34

Anonymous says ...

I'm sure it's really good, but what's Mann doing? Showing it to one person at a time who can blog about how good it is? The new test audience.

comment #35

Anonymous says ...

Or is he showing it to Wells and three other guys at a time, 2 of whom, at least, can blog about it later.

comment #36

Tom says ...

" A $130 million version of
'Crime Story' would be just as bad. There isn't
any need of a film like that costing $130 million.
These stars need to get a clue and lower their
asking prices by at least half, if not more!"

To be fair, I believe that the original price tag for Miami Vice was in the standard (at least it's become standard for a big studio summer release these days) $100 million dollar range.

None of the stars received giant salaries (i.e., salaries in the Tom Hanks $20 million and up range).

Rather, the cost overages were mainly due to reshoots and set closures partially brought on by the infamous 2005 hurricane season.

Apparently, those storms hindered shooting thereby upping the price of the film considerably.

comment #37

Joe Greenia says ...

Crime Story kicked ass though. The first season anyway.