5 Responsed To This Post
Subsribes to this topic Comment RSS or TrackBack URL
mygif_alt
Anonymous Says, in 1-17-2010 at 22:57:16 from     

I bought this DVD based upon comments on Amazon. Pacino and DeNiro put in fine performances in an otherwise slow moving movie. The movie would have received possibly 2 or 3 stars if it weren’t for the unbelievable shooting scenes, which I found an insult to a persons intelligence. The plot was reasonable just too slow, and certainly not worth purchasing.
Rating: 1 / 5

mygif
Michael LaRocca Says, in 1-17-2010 at 23:01:50 from     

The Good – Al Pacino versus Robert DeNiro

The Bad – Val Kilmer

The Ugly – A Michael Mann film

And the winner is…no drum roll needed here…the ugly. Michael Mann can’t stop sucking. No surprise there.

We begin with minimal dialogue and exposition through words, a MM trademark. Then they did finally “act” and were howlingly bad, another MM trademark. The writing, the delivery, and the overblown “action” scenes. Give me a medal for lasting 15 minutes. Okay, 10. It felt like many more. Please, MTV, give MM a job before he films again.

Rating: 1 / 5

mygif_alt
General Zombie Says, in 1-17-2010 at 23:52:11 from     

Here are some interesting facts relating to “Heat” and myself:

LENGTH OF FILM: 547 Minutes

NUMBER OF CHARACTERS IN FILM: 231

NUMBER OF INTERESTING OCCURRENCES: 0

NUMBER OF MINUTES I WAS INVOLVED/ENTERTAINED BY THIS FILM: 0

NUMBER OF TIMES I’VE STARTED WATCHING THIS FILM, THEN STOPPED: 5-6

Truth be told, I’ve never actually watched “Heat” in its entirety. I’ve seen almost all of it, and many parts of it multiple times, but never all the way through. (In fact, I think I probably have seen absolutely all of it, considering how many scenes I distinctly recall seeing repeatedly, but I can’t be sure.) Anyway, I’ll be sitting there trying to watch it and I just can’t do it. It’s so damn boring, and the thought of me being this bored for the next 8 hours is just too much and I have to do something else. Like randomly flip through the channels for the next couple hours. Maybe just stare at the walls and think. Mow the lawn, perhaps . Do some dishes. Clip my toe nails. Anything. (I hasten to add, however, that its extreme length isn’t really “Heat”s problem. It’s all boring. Cut it down to 100 minutes and it would still be really boring, just not for as long. Which would make it about twice as good, actually, but we’re talking about such a small baseline that the difference wouldn’t be terribly perceptible.)

And it’s not like this thing isn’t up my alley. People I trust and who have good taste tell me it’s good and I like crime-dramas. It has a generally excellent cast. But then I’ll be looking at the screen and not one thing, not one thing will happen that makes me want to keep looking at it. And so I stop. I’d like to be more specific, but it’s pretty damn hard to say why a film isn’t involving. It’s tough to describe a lack. Probably it has something to do with the film having so much going on that it doesn’t really have time to get into anything. I especially like how Pacino’s stepdaughter tries to off herself, yet we’ve only seen her on screen for like 2 minutes. Why would I care? Pacino’s marriage is failing, you say? Why would I care? Pacino and De Niro have tedious conversations with one another. Oh boy. It’s also hurt by their making Pacino a cop. He doesn’t much work as a good guy. Furthermore, the action scenes are dull as hell. Also, one of the major themes of the film is about how cop and robber are two sides of the same coin. For other examples of this see every other cop drama ever made, particularly the ones that suck. (This observation, by the way, comes from the film “Adaptation”, and though it didn’t specifically refer to “Heat” it totally applies. On a related note, “The 3″ would be about 1000 times more entertaining than “Heat”, were someone to make it. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, be sure to check out “Adaptation”. It’s a good example of a film that ISN’T really sucky and boring.)

Unlike some things I dislike I feel no animosity towards those who think “Heat” is great, though I can’t help but suspect that many of them were expecting a great movie, and so they got one at least in their heads. It’s got Pacino and De Niro together! It’s so damned long, complicated, self-important and humorless! It superficially resembles great films from the past! 4 stars!! I realize that this is unfair of me and I hate it when other people try and explain the hidden, false meanings why I like whatever movie they don’t like, but it’s what I think, and if that makes me a hypocrite, which it does, well, I can’t change that. And besides, it’s always possible that I’m right…. If in 20 years “Heat” is largely forgotten we can assume that I’m correct. If not I’ll watch it again, this time all the way through, and we’ll see if I’ve changed my mind, and we’ll finally know if everyone else was deluded or if I’m just a stupid freak who differed from most of the other wise viewers on this one. Get back to me in 2026. Perhaps we’ll have to make it 2031, cause the idea of me watching any of this movie again within the next 2 decades makes me a bit antsy. I need some more breathing room.

But til then, the hell with “Heat”. I’ll just watch “Taxi Driver” or “The Godfather” or “Goodfellas” or “The Departed” or whatever again. Just about anything will do, actually, regardless of quality or genre as long as it’s shorter than “Heat”.
Rating: 1 / 5

mygif
Chris Gibbs Says, in 1-18-2010 at 00:10:02 from     

Somebody, maybe Pauline Kael, talked about the pornography of violence. In that sense, Michael Mann makes pornographic films: very hard guys, very lovely women, very little dialog, and lots of automatic weapons fire and spattering blood sacks for the jaded audience. No actual humans need be portrayed, no actual interaction is therefore required; just pretty people banging away. Only Mann’s films, pretending to be something other than what they are (not sure what, though), go on forever. At least porn’s unpretentious and quick. Honest. Give it a try. Rent something XXX and compare it with “Heat.” You’ll see.
Rating: 1 / 5

mygif_alt
C. Nagano Says, in 1-18-2010 at 02:56:05 from     

It’s really troubling to see all the reviewers talk about how great Pacino and De Niro are together, when actually there is only one scene they share.

Moreover, the two probably were never even on the set at the same time, as the coffee scene is shot in singles and over the shoulders. Now wouldn’t any director, if he had the chance (even one as stupid as Michael Mann) die to have at least one shot where we could show these two giants together? So each actor was shot separately with probably a stand-in or the script girl reading the lines of the other.
Rating: 1 / 5

Leave A Reply

 Username (*required)

 Email Address (*private)

 Website (*optional)

Inform me when someone post new message here

Please Note: Comments Moderation maybe active so there is no need to resubmit your comment