[Edwin Pereyra]

Quote:

b/c Vincent is doing all the things to get Max out of his shell, I had the feeling he would let him live.

No way. Max is not only a material witness to the killings but he also meets the guy who orders the killings. Vincent wouldn't be that dumb to just let Max live.

~Edwin

[Edwin Pereyra]

That's why it also doesn't make sense why Vincent did not shoot him before or after Max overturned the taxi cab. Instead he just left him there thereby giving him an opportunity to turn in Felix.

~Edwin

[Quentin]

That's why it also doesn't make sense why Vincent did not shoot him before or after Max overturned the taxi cab. Instead he just left him there thereby giving him an opportunity to turn in Felix.

Actually, that's one of the few things that does make sense. Vincent can't reach his gun, the cops are coming, he needs to vacate the crash scene. So, he leaves.

I'm sure he would have gone after Felix once he hit his last target.

Of course, I was sure Vincent wouldn't miss a target 6 feet away when emptying a clip...

[Edwin Pereyra]

Quote:

the cops are coming

How convenient. They're there or not there at the director's wish to prolong a plot.

~Edwin

[CharlieD]

My thoughts on this film:

Problems:
#1 As stated before, the idea of keeping the cabbie around once he knows what is happening and actively wants nothing to do with it doesn't make sense. Kill him and get a new naive cabbie who won't cause you a problem. Vincent doesn't think anything about killing people. He say as much to Max.

#2 If Vincent is to succeed in his plan and remain anonymous he must return to the hospital (which has cameras as all hospitals do) and kill Max's mother. This being a result of his choice to get involved with Max's mother. This is especially troubling to the plot since the only reason they are there is because of Vincent's insistence. His options are: a.) don't go to the hospital and allow Max's mother to be worried and possibly attract some unwanted attention; or b.) go to the hospital, be seen by security cameras with the man you intend to setup for killings (as indicated by the horrible Mark Ruffalo speech about the "crazy cab driver in the Bay Area") and introduce yourself to the man's mother who you will have to later return to kill because she knows her son was with another man. Option b makes no sense.

#3 I work in downtown LA and I have the exact phone that Max steals. Let me tell you this, there is no better phone reception in 100 miles than downtown LA. On top of that, there is no reason for the phone to die or have bad reception. It wasn't necessary. Him explaining to her how he knows what is going on and her process of deciding what to believe would have provided enough time for Vincent to make it there. The cell phone cliche was just a bad choice.

#4 Digital video looks shitty side by side with film. I don't have anything against DV perse, but to use it with film seems like a bad choice. The video would have looked 100x better if I didn't see pristine 35mm intercut with it. If some of the shots wouldn't have worked on film (the total darkness of the high rise shootout) then shoot HD video, but don't mix the two. It ruins the visual continuity and distracts the audience (at least if that audience is me).

#5 The ending was too easy for Max. I am not saying he should die because thematically that would have been inconsistent. But I do think that there should have been some consequence for his involvement. My preference would have been him watching the DA, his potential girlfriend, murdered (or at least shot). Vincent chases the DA, Max chases Vincent. Max is too late, but would have had the upper hand and an element of surprise. This would have made his victory over the pro a little more believable.

Strengths:
#1 The cinematography is fantastic. Los Angeles never looked so good. And the kinetic style of movement and composition was gorgeous. Lighting was very "real" and flat at times, but as a stylistic choice, I think this was a good call. It added to the "feel" of film.

#2 No one shoots a gunfight like Michael Mann. The disruptive nature of gunshots, the sound, the panic, the speed, the fear - he is the master. The scene in the club (even though I agree that the music could have been mixed louder) was masterfully done.

#3 The sound design was great. Music, effects, dialog (the way the dialog was mixed not the lines themselves) all in perfect balance and appropriately designed for the film.

#4 Pacing was spot on. Never felt slow and never felt rushed. This made it more bothersome that what was unfolding so perfectly wasn't as good as the way it unfolded.

Overall, I have to say I enjoyed the film, but I am disappointed in some of the weaknesses of the script. Most of my problems (aside from the questionable choice of shooting on two mediums with such disparate strengths) come directly from the script, but that is usually the case for me.

Hollywood has such gifted craftsmen and storytellers, but all too often lacks a great story to tell.

[Steve Felix]

Re: the second #3 :

It's not the format, it's the lighting style. It's a fine point that you don't want them to push the lower limits of what is possible to record and mix it with better lit footage, but it's not video that makes the difference. If the film scenes were shot on similarly lit video, the same visual disconnect would be present.

According to the American Cinematographer article, they were pushing the video to +12dB, which is a LOT of gain. Video as a whole is presently being dismissed by many based on its performance at +12dB while a shooter serious about quality wouldn't go beyond 0dB.

Naturally, I agree with you that in this case the flatness was a good choice. (Except possibly one that should have been sustained thoughout. Although, the styles sort of separated the indoors from the streets.)

[MikeMcNertney]

Unlike other people, I had absolutely no qualms with this picture. I tried to stay away from reviews, but had heard rumblings of a bad ending; I was expecting the worst (everybody committing suicide, random car crash, everybody going to jail, etc). I was pleasantly surprised. Yes, the ending could be called cliche; indeed, we have seen many subway chases before. But have we ever seen one directed this damn well? Just because dozens of other directors create subpar subway scenes, is the Mann somehow disqualified from making a superior one? I don't think so. We have Vincent seeing Max as such a pathetic guy, and unconsciously teaching him in the art of becoming self-assured. Max unconsciously learns from Max, and therefore, the finale.

The problem with the ending has nothing to do with the fact that it is on a subway, or that Max gains the confidence to stand up to Vincent. It is the fact that a guy with no experience with firearms (or at least it is so indicated earlier in the film) gets into a point-blank standoff with a professional killer who is extremely deadly and accurate, and comes out the victor with nary a scratch. It is not even too unbelievable that Max would hit at that range... but how could Vincent possibly miss with an entire clip?

I'd have to see it again to be sure, but my friend had a theory about the bullet marks in the door. He thought maybe they were in the classic Vincent "two in the chest one in the head" pattern, and therefore lodged themselves in the heavier metal part of the door rather than going through. I had thought the shots of the door actually showed the bullets penetrating, so I'd have to see it again, but this is the most plausible explanation of how Vincent could have failed that I can come up with.

With all the talk about cliches, I do want to point out that I REALLY liked how it avoided the cliche of "the one cop who knows whats up saving the day." I really thought he was going to get Max out and clear his name, but instead he is shot by Vincent

[CharlieD]

Sorry about the two #3's I fixed that.

While the lighting differences certainly exacerbated the issue, video just simply doesn't have the resolution or color palette of film. HD video certainly has its advantages over film (light sensitivity, portablity, immediate full-res playback), but when viewing the two side by side, only the negative differences are noticable.

So while I agree with you about the lighting, to say that it has nothing to do with the format is untrue.

[BrentJ]

I really enjoyed this film. Not as good as Heat but right up there with it!