comment #1

actionman says ...

fuckin' A! this movie is incredible and I'm glad that there seems to be a fair number of people who agree with me. it's made a few top 10 lists which makes me smile.

comment #2

le corbeau says ...

Where he sees emotion, I saw some heavy-handed dialogue about a bad childhood and actors who seemed to be passing each other in an airport.

Sorry, but none of that was true for me when I saw it.

comment #3

Mike Schaefer says ...

It's always interesting to read someone trying to sell you on the fact that a messy mediocrity is in fact a masterpiece. David Denby has done it countless times with DePalma's lesser works. Sorry, I'm still not convinced.

But thanks for the link, I wasn't even aware of that 4-hour kids-with-cancer documentary (!), and I still haven't seen "Clean".

comment #4

jesse says ...

I *wish* I saw what Rowin did in Miami Vice. But it's not there -- if Michael Mann's name wasn't on this thing, this guy would not be rhapsodizing about how it's an anti-action movie full of life and beautiful abstractions. Yes, the movie had some great images -- but so did Collateral, a very good film that still wasn't as good as Heat or The Insider. I'm not saying Mann is over; just that Miami Vice didn't have the characters to complement its mood (all of the other Mann pictures I mention have that). Jeff, it disgusts you when Hollywood "kowtows" to Spielberg and a movie like Munich (a better-made, smarter, and altogether underrated movie that is actually ABOUT something); how is this not smartass-filmcrit kowtowing to Mann?

comment #5

The Movie Man says ...

Miami Vice is pretty good, but its a middle tier Michael Mann film. People who hate it probably like their shoot 'em ups a little more traditional, and people who love it probably want to be the cool cats who see a great, revelatory movie in something that no else does.

But, as well executed as MV is, it mainly exists for Mann to jerk off with the digital technology. Not that anyone will admit that because that doesn't exactly make for the most attention getting movie essay. This was also true of some of the DePalma apologists who somehow convinced themselves that the awful Black Dahlia was somehow "pure cinema" (their way of praising a film but still subtly conceding that it has absolutely nothing going on in it and is barely coherent).

comment #6

Dixon Steele says ...

All the revisionism in the world can't save this one.

Still, I love the comparison to Samuel Beckett. Maybe they should've called it "Waiting for Crockett".

Unfortunately, the movie was more like "Endgame".

comment #7

gatsby1040 says ...

The perverse brilliance of the film isn't in the narrative, script, or performances, but in the way all of the above are constantly ignored in favor of one plunge after another into some of the most baroque, beautiful visual imagery I saw all year. A glorious, flawed mess of a movie. While it's surely inferior to Mann's earlier work in Heat or The Insider -- neither of those reach as far into Mann's neon, near-psychedelic visual abstraction as MV does.

comment #8

The Movie Man says ...

Mike-didn't mean to rip you off buddy, you know what they say about great minds...

comment #9

gatsby1040 says ...

The perverse brilliance of the film isn't in the narrative, script, or performances, but in the way all of the above are constantly ignored in favor of one plunge after another into some of the most baroque, beautiful visual imagery I saw all year. A glorious, flawed mess of a movie. While it's surely inferior to Mann's earlier work in Heat or The Insider -- neither of those reach as far into Mann's neon, near-psychedelic visual abstraction as MV does.

comment #10

christian says ...

brilliant dixon.

but what praytell is "true sensuousness and emotion"? because it seems false sensuousness and emotion is what this sharper image catalog movie is all about.

and i would argue that truth comes from creating breathing charaters not sketches of actors.

comment #11

jesse says ...

MovieMan, I'd actually argue that Black Dahlia is a far better movie than Miami Vice, because at least I had *fun* sifting through that mess. The quality that some admired about Miami Vice -- the way it just drops you into the world/story/whatever you want to call it without much exposition -- made it seem like Mann couldn't be bothered to convince you why you should be interested in any of this.

(Children of Men drops you in like that, too, but does so beautifully.)

comment #12

OddDuck says ...

I'm a big Miami Vice cheerleader, but after watching it for the second time, even I will admit some of the dialogue is downright laughable.

On the positive end, the action sequences that I originally found somewhat underwhelming now seem pretty fucking masterful. Mann makes Bay and his like look they painting by numbers. The violence in Mann's movies is so quick to jump off that I get more excitement watching a scene with the potential for action in a Mann film than I do watching actual action in most others.

That said, I'm still waiting for Mann to match the mindblowingingly incredible action setpieces in Heat.

One last thing - on a properly calibrated HD screen, this movie is just astoundingly beautiful to watch at times. The graininess that bothered me in the theater isn't nearly as bad, and some of the visual compositions are amazing.

comment #13

CambridgeCat says ...

I liked Miami Vice (and suspect I may like it a LOT) when I finally see it again, but I thought the lack of chemistry between Gong Li and Colin Farrell was one of its big flaws. I liked the idea that they were sprung but didn't relly buy it. Frankly, those sex scenes came off very cold to me. In fact, take Farrell out of the Crockett role (didn't really buy him, did he try to sound like Don Johnson or what?) and a lot of the movies problems would have been solved, IMO.

comment #14

gatsby1040 says ...

The Black Dahlia is really, really bad -- but it still had two or three of the best cinematic sequences this year (that is, before Children of Men). DePalma has only made a perfect film a few times (Blow Out, Carlito's Way, Carrie), but he is the greatest cinematic stager since Hitchcock. His set pieces, suspense sequences, and chase scenes have never been bettered. The Museum sequence in Dressed to Kill alone would earn him hall-of-fame status.

comment #15

OddDuck says ...

Did anybody here watch the "director's cut" DVD? I did, and found it decidedly inferior.

--the tiny little bit of new footage added nothing

--the awesome drop-in opening from the theatrical release is gone and replaced with an fun looking but far more conventional boat race scene

--MOST ANNOYINGLY, the buildup to the last shootout had scored music in the movie, which I don't remmeber very well, but which I'm sure was effective. In the DVD Mann replaces this with that INCREDIBLY LAME nu-pop dumbass band's crappy remake of that already not-aging-very-well Phill Collins song. Totally tooke me out of the movie. My recommendation for anyone looking to buy this movie is to get the theatrical version.

comment #16

Craig Kennedy says ...

Alas OddDuck, I only saw the director's cut DVD because that's what Netflix sent me. I was waiting to see the theatrical version before passing final judgement. So far my opinion is 'just ok'. I loved looking at it...that scene on the rooftop of the club just after sunset with the glittering (in focus) city behind them...amazing. But characters and dialogue seemed to be in short supply and that was a drawback.

The Phil Collins remake? Huge error in judgement. I was hoping it would not be referred to and I was very annoyed when they played it...during the climax of the friggin movie. It was only later I learned it didn't play that way in the theater. I don't know about the other changes made to the film, but that was really bad.

comment #17

OddDuck says ...

cjKennedy, I sought out the theatrical release for purchase after getting the director's cut from Netflix. It's too bad, because the director's cut has more features and Mann commentary, but it's truly a shittier version of the movie so easy call.

Yeah, Michael Mann's choice in music is really questionable. I love, love, love most of his scored music, but the rock songs he uses? They just seem so, well, lame. Audioslave? Linkin Park? What the fuck?

comment #18

Craig Kennedy says ...

I'll get it at one of the brick and mortar video stores around here. Maybe I'll find the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven while I'm at it...another one Netflix doesn't carry.

comment #19

Ju-osh says ...

I've said it before and I'll say it again:
Cancel your Netflix account and open up a GreenCine.com account instead.
The folks at GreenCine.com love movies, know movies, and keep a great daily links like blog, too!
Netflix is the Blockbuster of mail-rentals, the Wal-mart of online dvd shops.
Fuck big business...right, Jeff?

Their homepage:
http://www.greencine.com/main
Their blog:
http://daily.greencine.com

comment #20

OddDuck says ...

As soon as Greencine.com gets an east coast shipping center I'll sign up (they have one mailing location in CA). I live in NYC and Netflix's NJ location gets me my DVD's next day -- on one occasion I somehow got a DVD the same day even.

comment #21

T. S. Idiot says ...

Most of us will agree that Heat is Mann's masterpiece, that's it's one of the greatest action films, neo-noirs, whatever you want to call it, of all time. Yet how many Oscars did it win? How many was it even nominated for? Zero. Not even for cinematography. Then why waste all this time and effort on debating the Oscars? They're a joke.

comment #22

leonardcoehnbrothers says ...

Gee, Jeff, even us simple-minded fly-over state morons know this is a piece of mediocrity.

comment #23

jeffmcm says ...

El snoozerino.

comment #24

OddDuck says ...

Miami Vice has major flaws, but it is not mediocre.

And yes, Heat is truly one of the very very best crime movies ever directed. Watched it on a huge screen at a friend's house recently and man has it has aged well. Pacino's performance grates on me far less than it used to, scenes that I found extraneous in earlier viewings now seem to "fit" more, and the suspense, action and sheer violence are all just as effective, scary and beautiful. Damn that movie is awesome.

comment #25

corey3rd says ...

all I saw was a movie that ripped off the plots from three of its better episodes. It was a retread except they didn't have to run Glen Frey's "Smuggler's Blues" on the soundtrack.

comment #26

OddDuck says ...

Dude, plot is perhaps the least important aspect of Miami Vice the movie.

comment #27

sardine says ...

MV is a junk-yard L'Aventura. terrific movie

comment #28

vansmith says ...

Vice was great, but not in the way we anticipated, it was about slowing down the pace and heightening the mood, it was understated where we were expecting over the top maybe. the shoot outs were tremendous from a sound point of view, the first one where the camera was in the back seat and the gun blew a hole thru the guy and the front seat was amazing, people in the theater jumped. mann basically says fuck you im doing what i want whether your a fan or not of my work. a daytime miami beach car chase and some bikini's on the beach and the movie would have done double at the b.o. and they knew that but he still said no, fuck you this is the real miami vice, and the public went YAWN...

comment #29

Geoff says ...

Those who can't appreciate Miami Vice and have no understanding of what this guy is writing about really don't enjoy movies as much as those who do.

comment #30

Craig Kennedy says ...

Thanks for enriching the dialogue with your thoughtfully considered and cogent argument there, Geoff.

I think you're on to something vansmith. I just read somewhere (was it this thread? I looked and didn't see it...apologies to whoever I'm paraphrasing uncredited) someone suggested the movie was too smart for the action crowd and not 'there' enough for the film snobs. It kind of fell into a middle ground that disappointed both aesthetics in many cases.

I don't know what I was expecting going in. Never watched the show, loved Heat and really liked Collateral. I'll check out the original cut and see what happens.

comment #31

christian says ...

i was gonna say something bad about the film, but it's
like shooting crocketts in a tubbs.

comment #32

MovieBob says ...

Enough is FUCKING enough.

Yes, dammit, the cinematography is nifty as all get out, but that's IT. There is NOTHING to this movie, it's as empty as "Attack of The Clones." Just an excuse for Mann to experiment further with his DV cameras, using the "franchise" handle in order to profit while doing so. It's little more than a less-funny, bi-racial "Bad Boys" sequel feigning arthouse pretense. Mann is a god, yes, fine. But even gods blow it sometimes, and if Mann were God this would be his Platypus.

comment #33

OddDuck says ...

MovieBob,

Now that's an indictment of Vice that I can at least respect. But it is really empty? What makes it empty for you? The lack of backstory? I really view this movie as Mann's take on a procedural. There's almost no glimpse into the background lives of these characters, which I think is fine -- Mann's thing has always been to define people through their work. What in your mind did Mann need to do to enrich this? Or was it the performances that emptied it out for you? I'll admit there were times when it seemed like both main leads were concentrating really really hard on looking cool and the result could be kinda funny. That, and the occasional riff of drop-dead terrible dialogue, almost took me out of the movie, but I decided to just go along with it, because as a movie titled "Miami Vice", some level of heightened reality (melodramatic cheesiness) is necessarily part of the mix.

Also, even if it is "empty", you admit the cinematography is "nifty". Isn't really cool cinematography plus some good action directed by someone other than Michael Bay enough to recommend a movie these days?

comment #34

MovieBob says ...

OddDuck
"What in your mind did Mann need to do to enrich this? Or was it the performances that emptied it out for you?"

Put something up there that can either be followed or cared about. Here's the thing: Visual flash and experimentation are one thing, but unless you're going for full-blown abstraction any film with the semblance of a narrative needs something to invest the other applicable sense in while the eyes are enjoying the image. Ideally, interesting characters or an interesting will do, even one or the other will work.. MV has neither.

"Also, even if it is "empty", you admit the cinematography is "nifty". Isn't really cool cinematography plus some good action directed by someone other than Michael Bay enough to recommend a movie these days?"

No. Thing about Bay is, when he's "on" he can actually engage an audience. Yes, he does so in the manner of one drunken frat guy describing a half-true sexual conquest to five other drunken frat guys, but there y'go. Mann can do the same, and better, as even "Collateral" showed. This time, he didn't.

comment #35

Craig Kennedy says ...

I don't know. I'm still mulling over Sardine's comment that Miami Vice is a junk-yard L'Avventura. I don't completely buy the idea (for one thing I was somehow drawn to Monica Vitti in a way I was not to Gong Li, Jamie Foxx or Colin Farrell) but it makes me wonder just how much plot and character is neccessary for a film to be great and that kind of ties in to what OddDuck just said.

As a counterpoint to OddDuck's last point though, if Miami Vice was the exact same film but the opening credits said "Directed by Michael Bay", there would've been many more people bringing the hate, but since it was Michael Mann it seems like a lot of people are looking a little harder for something good about it.

comment #36

OddDuck says ...

Notwithstanding my criticism of some of the dialogue and the occasional embarrassing "cool posing" by the leads, I enjoyed all the characters in MV. While there was hardly any background info given for anybody, there was enough of a distinct vibe coming from each of them to invest me to the extent possible when watching a procedural. However I will freely admit this is the weakest aspect of the movie.

I have never ever been engaged by even a minute of a Michael Bay movie. He is, quite simply, an incredibly obnoxious and awful director of meaningless visual noise (in my humble opinion).

As to cjKennedy's last point, sure I'll dig a little deeper when viewing a Mann film. But I think it's only fair, as his track record has shown that to be a worthwhile endeavor. That doesn't make me a thoughtless fanboy (not a big lover of Collateral, which I found just ludicrous), but good directors I think earn patience from their audience.

comment #37

Craig Kennedy says ...

You're absolutely right about your last point OddDuck and I meant in no way to imply any tolerance for Michael Bay. Except for the purposes of playing devil's advocate, I wouldn't even use Michael Bay in the same sentence as Michael Mann unless the connecting phrase was "is nothing like".

It's easy for a director's solid (or bad) track record to influence opinion of his/her films and that's not necessarily a bad thing. I really liked David Lynch's Inland Empire. Most people I know of hated it so I'm wondering if I'm just trying too hard because of my affection for all of his previous films.