- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 1995 movie Heat, De Niro, Pacino, etc
Posted on 5/10/23 at 2:55 pm to SidetrackSilvera
Posted on 5/10/23 at 2:55 pm to SidetrackSilvera
quote:
It's a book about metals.
i am from the bay area
Posted on 5/11/23 at 9:56 am to saintsfan22
I know I'm in the super duper minority about this, but the whole "great arse" line I thought was really unfitting and forced, and frankly took me out of the immersion of the movie. It just didn't fit with the scene or honestly make a whole lot of sense. I felt it was awkward and was more of a "oh this is an Al Pacino adlib where he takes over a scene by vastly over acting and sticking out like a sore thumb, we got to keep this in."
This post was edited on 5/11/23 at 10:06 am
Posted on 5/11/23 at 11:16 am to emanresu
I don’t think anyone really thinks highly of that line or scene. It’s mostly played or referenced as a joke because of how over the top it is
Posted on 5/11/23 at 4:26 pm to wildtigercat93
quote:
You cannot get a more realistic shootout on film without shooting an actual crime
Michael Mann after reading your post:
Posted on 5/11/23 at 9:35 pm to Sun God
I just watched it for the first time.
The shoot out scene was incredible. The rest of it was just ok.
It felt a bit like Robert De Niro and Al Pacino should have played each other’s roles.
I wanted Val Kilmer’s character to get killed in the shootout.
The shoot out scene was incredible. The rest of it was just ok.
It felt a bit like Robert De Niro and Al Pacino should have played each other’s roles.
I wanted Val Kilmer’s character to get killed in the shootout.
Posted on 5/11/23 at 10:13 pm to upgrade
quote:
Robert De Niro and Al Pacino
The movie is great in its own right, but I think much of the build-up and its favorable memory for us was due to the fact that, unbelievably, it was the first movie that DeNiro and Pacino shared a scene.
Posted on 5/12/23 at 1:39 am to emanresu
quote:
I know I'm in the super duper minority about this, but the whole "great arse" line I thought was really unfitting and forced, and frankly took me out of the immersion of the movie. It just didn't fit with the scene or honestly make a whole lot of sense. I felt it was awkward and was more of a "oh this is an Al Pacino adlib where he takes over a scene by vastly over acting and sticking out like a sore thumb, we got to keep this in."
Pacino himself has said that he was flying super high on cocaine during that scene
Posted on 5/12/23 at 8:22 am to Gaggle
That would've helped me a TON while watching pacinos performance.
Posted on 5/12/23 at 8:34 am to Sun God
Why would Mann be taking notes about the scene when he wrote and directed said scene?
Posted on 5/12/23 at 8:37 am to Byron Bojangles III
“without shooting an actual crime”
Posted on 5/12/23 at 9:09 am to Che Boludo
quote:
it was the first movie that DeNiro and Pacino shared a scene.
For me this is true. I specifically watched it to see this, but really did like the movie when it came out. Haven't seen it in years so may give it a rewatch.
Posted on 5/12/23 at 9:26 am to TotesMcGotes
quote:
The whole idea is that he’s the most disciplined thief you can possibly be. The love story is necessary to test that.
What? He goes back for revenge on ex team member when he was already on the way to the airport. Relationship really had nothing to do with that. He wasn't disciplined at all, it was a facade he gave off.
Posted on 5/12/23 at 11:21 am to Hu_Flung_Pu
quote:
What? He goes back for revenge on ex team member when he was already on the way to the airport. Relationship really had nothing to do with that. He wasn't disciplined at all, it was a facade he gave off.
Never seen someone whiff this hard on a point.
That was the challenge to see if he was as committed to his ideals as he bragged the entire movie
It’s the lynchpin of the entire fricking plot man
Posted on 5/12/23 at 12:36 pm to wildtigercat93
quote:
Never seen someone whiff this hard on a point.
That was the challenge to see if he was as committed to his ideals as he bragged the entire movie
It’s the lynchpin of the entire fricking plot man
I'm going to try to remember everything I noticed in the movie.
McCauley seemed disciplined the entire movie but actually wasn't. His 30 seconds flat was nothing concrete as his entire crew had tie-downs. A disciplined leader wouldn't let that happen. He would also vet members that don't rat or say stupid shite.
Did he not vet Cheritto and Waingro for stability issues? Why would a disciplined person take Waingro to a damn diner to go kill him out back in the parking lot? Why not kidnap him and kill him somewhere else? Cheritto is chatting up about jobs to other people. That's the entire reason the cops were on them in the first place.
He kept letting Chris do gambling problems and having problems at home. I don't see a disciplined leader doing that.
What about going back to kill Waingro after he was home free to leave on the plane?
The relationship showed that he was done with the whole thing and wanted out of being alone.
Again, it was a show that he was disciplined not that he actually was.
Overall, he let his emotions get to him. Opposite of being disciplined.
The love story was not part of the discipline part but the end of "being disciplined" and out of that life.
This post was edited on 5/12/23 at 2:38 pm
Posted on 10/22/23 at 12:08 pm to chinese58
quote:
The robberies/shootouts are great but most of the rest of the movie sucks. The scenes of Pacino with Diane Venora have made me stop the movie and watch something else. The De Niro scenes with Amy Brenneman aren't as over the top, but her interest in him has always seemed silly to me. The only relationship that I find interesting in Val Kilmer and Ashley Judd. It's the only one that makes sense too. She's hooker and he's a thief.
I saw it once in the theater in 1995 and then again last night for the first time since. This is kind of where I'm at. I don't think the movie has aged well at all.
For starters, it just seems utterly palpable now how much the OFFscreen excitement about Pacino and DeNiro finally sharing scenes was expected to carry the movie. But if you strip that bit of superstardom away, I just found the stakes to be WAY too low to generate any compelling emotions. I mean, it's LA cops chasing bank robbers. Important work, sure. But not exactly god's work.
It also seemed like they wrote the maxim about walking away in 30 seconds and then tried to shoehorn a movie to it. It was very ham-handed, IMO. Others have mentioned it, but the DeNiro/Brennaman love interest was NOT in any way believable or compelling in terms of setting up the supposed choice DeNiro had to ultimately make.
The direction seemed almost intentionally anti-Mamet-esque, in that many things were shown onscreen that did not move the plot or the characters forward. e.g. After Haysbert breaks bad again, they spend time showing his mom/GF/whatever in the bar reacting to seeing it on TV. This was truly neither here nor there for the characters nor the story. Ditto the ridiculous kicking the broken TV out of the car scene. (Also, why did they show Waingro coming out of the can and asking for a refill of coffee?)
I was highly entertained at some of the casting - Tone Loc? Henry Rollins? lol
The fire alarm scene at the hotel towards the end - that just seemed absurd also. One person pulling an alarm evidently results in the COMPLETE evacuation of (seemingly) the most populous hotel in the entire city? Might have made more sense if he had generated some actual smoke/fire, but the way they played it was just not believable.
Fichtner sub-plot seemed superfluous as well.
I understand why the movie was made and got so much hype, but it ultimately collapses under its own considerable weight. Yeah yeah, the shootout scene. It's fine, I guess, although it also is there ONLY for its own mastubatory, set piece benefit. It doesn't actually move anything forward.
ETA: I still give the movie 2.5 out of 4 stars. It's good, just not a masterpiece. It was VERY full of itself for having the 2 icons (and, as many people have mentioned, Pacino was just absurd).
This post was edited on 10/22/23 at 5:12 pm
Posted on 10/22/23 at 2:03 pm to selfgen
Awesome movie despite Pacino randomly choosing lines to shout out of context.
I don't think his pseudo-tourettes is all that entertaining.
I don't think his pseudo-tourettes is all that entertaining.
This post was edited on 10/22/23 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 10/22/23 at 2:34 pm to selfgen
This movie is my fathers favorite. He watches it every time he notices it's on.
Posted on 10/22/23 at 3:14 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
The fire alarm scene at the hotel towards the end - that just seemed absurd also. One person pulling an alarm evidently results in the COMPLETE evacuation of (seemingly) the most populous hotel in the entire city? Might have made more sense if he had generated some actual smoke/fire, but the way they played it was just not believable.
Well, I have never been in a building that was on fire but if a fire alarm goes off I think I’m evacuating. You do you bro.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News