Movie Review 4 - Heat

  Heat, directed by Michael Mann, is truly a spectacle.  The 1995 film starring Al Pacino, Robert De Niro and Val Kilmer tells the story of a group of highly skilled thieves as they are tracked down by a veteran detective.  Even with the film's menacing 3 hour run time, it manages to entrance the audience in its epic plot and intricately woven characters.

  Heat tells the story of Neil McCauley (De Niro) and his crew of highly professional thieves during a series of robberies, relentlessly tracked by homicide detective Vincent Hanna (Pacino).  The film opens with the robbery of an armored car, performed flawlessly until the newcomer into McCauley's gang accidentally kills a guard.  The gang is forced to kill the remaining guards because of this, which infuriates McCauley.  These thieves run a tightly woven routine, highly practiced in their line of work, without room for error, so when a hiccup like this occurs it is truly a big deal for them.  The caliber of these thieves is matched by detective Hanna's relentlessness in his line of work.  On his third marriage, Hanna is a man who has only one love, and it's to his line of work.  His current wife is unsatisfied because Hanna never has time for her, but he doesn't have any other options; tracking down criminals is all he knows how to do.  It's the clash between these two unstoppable forces that creates such an interesting film.  The film does an excellent job in creating anti heroes, making the audience question who they should be cheering for.  Mann creates two leads, one "good" and one "bad", completely similar in their personalities and motivation but opposite in their morals.  He separates the line between good guy and bad guy, making the audience as attached the murderous robber as they are to the virtuous detective.

  The cast is the real backbone to this compelling story.  Both Pacino and De Niro are amazing in their performances.  They both portray men who, although they're almost on opposite sides of the spectrum, share a lot of the same problems.  They're troubled men with troubled relationships, and Pacino and De Niro show this perfectly, combining their brooding attitude with their strong willingness and relentlessness.  The rest of the cast does a fine job, with Val Kilmer, Tom Sizemore, Danny Trejo and the violent and disturbed character of  Kevin Gage rounding out of the crew of thieves quite well.  The main thing I liked about the film was the chemistry between De Niro and Pacino.  There is a scene in the film where Pacino and De Niro talk over coffee, discussing their lives and professions.  Both men explain that although they do not wish it, if in a tight situation they would not hesitate to kill the other.  The men truly respect each other, because they aren't very different from each other.  To Hanna and McCauley, tracking criminals and stealing are the only things they know how to do. 

  In conclusion, I'd like to say that you should definitely watch Heat.  You may be turned off by it's long run-time or it's cheesy or cliché appearance, but I'd insist that once you see the film, you'll be pleasantly surprised.  It has fantastic actions scenes, it has compelling characters and it has an epic plot that will leave you satisfied.  So I insist, as long as you can take the Heat, you need to view this film. 

Old vs New - The Count of Monte Cristo

  Some things get better with age and other things don't.  Although the 2002 Count of Monte Cristo had a higher budget and the benefits of modern day filmmaking, I would still have to say that I enjoyed the 1934 version more.  To me, the original Count of Monte Cristo was much more entertaining because of the characters.  The Count himself was much more suave in the original, and I generally enjoyed his character much more because he seemed more virtuous and badass.  In the remake, I found the Count to be a less likeable character, for he didn't have the swashbuckling qualities that Robert Donat showed in his portrayal.  This goes for the rest of the characters as well, as while in the original they seemed much more unique and lively, while in the remake I found the supporting cast to be boring and unlikeable.  This to me, ultimatemly boiled down to the new film being too edgy for my liking.  While the original had so much character, the new version always seemed to be trying to hard to be dark.  For example, in the original the Abbe's room was very bright and exciting, while in the new version it was blander and darker.  The new film's darker tone could be attributed to it's vision of realism in comparison to the original, but I personally would still favor the original's personality over bland realism.  I was also dissapointed by the new versions conclusion, as it felt clumsy and less satisfying than the original film's.  In the original, the Count had a proper punishment for each of the antagonists, exploiting each of their deepest flaws and hubris perfectly, which was incredibly satisfying to watch.  In the new version however, it didn't feel as satisfying, for the punishments didn't feel as perfectly coordinated.  In comparison, the newer film is technically superior: the sets are more elaborate, the plot is streamlined and the budget is enormous, but all of these still can't trump the original film's undeniable charm and satisfying conclusion. 

Night of the Living Dead Impressions

  Overall, I found Night of the Living Dead to be a very interesting and atmospheric film, but I didn't find it very entertaining.  I thought the film had it's strengths and weaknesses.  On one hand I thought that the make-up and the overall uneasy and claustrophobic atmosphere were done very well, but on the other I believe that the pacing and the characters brought the film down.  I never found myself liking any of the characters in particular, with the exception of Ben.  The women were all typical and helpless, and the other men in the film were either too arrogant or too foolish.  I even found Ben to be a little unbelievable, as he was too dominant and controlling in the way he bossed around the father.  I found every one of the characters be as unrealistic as they were unlikeable.  The pacing of the film also seemed off to me, as the action was too up and down; it was like a roller coaster ride that ended right before the drop.  What I did enjoy were the make up, the music and the set.  The scenes which showed the zombie hobbling towards the house were fantastic, as the ominous music in combination with the grotesque and shocking zombies were truly scary.  This in combination with the hectic and tightly packed house work well to create the feeling of claustrophobia and impending doom.  I have to give credit to the film for it's originality.  Although it wasn't the first zombie film, it's undeniably influential in its vision of the slow, shambling flesh eating zombie and the zombie apocalypse, without this film, we wouldn't have the strong zombie genre that we have today.  It isn't the best acted film, or outstanding in terms of plot, but Night of the Living Dead is oozing with creativity.