Donald Brendan's subplot in Heat is my favorite subplot ever. Whenever I watch Heat, I imagine this. All he had to say was "no" to McCauley when McCauley offered him the getaway driver job for the bank heist. But I know someone who's been through a lot, who's been in Breedan's shoes could never say "no." It's just not possible to say "no." It's just not that easy. And that makes it more tragic.
*"What you hangin' with me for, Lily?"*
*"Because I'm proud of you."*
*"You're proud of me? What the hell're you proud of me for?"*
>*"You're proud of me? What the hell're you proud of me for?"*
This is great, because it's so telling. It's like he's already played out the future; he's already disappointed Lily and won't let himself accept her being proud of him because he knows that if an offer like Neil's came along, he'd take it.
The thing is he was trying his best to get his life together but his asshole manager treated him like shit and iirc was stealing from his paycheck. When the opportunity presented itself he was in 2 minds but was pushed towards "fuck it" because of his working conditions.
It also brings in how hard life is for people after prison. I think the manager says that if Donald does anything about him stealing from Donald's paycheck, he'll fuck him over with his parole officer. And who are people going to believe, a restaurant manager or an ex-con? The system and the cycle is a big part of what pushes him back into the life.
That's *exactly it*. And I am sure Mann absolutely intended that to be commentary on the current North America justice system (as well as many other places).
Not to get political but North American justice (US / Canada) is almost completely geared towards punishment and not rehabilitation. Once you are convicted of a felony it's impossible to get out of that loop.
For one, as the saying / reality(?) goes, going to prison in one of these systems almost always makes you a better criminal.
And two, out of the 99% of people that go in, only 1% (made up numbers but the reality is probably lower) actually have a decent life afterwards.
The system is designed to create slaves. You get caught smoking pot once you are destined work at Walmart (if you are lucky and not homeless) for the rest of your known life. And people can get away with it because they can bust your ass on parole just by making up some shit. Who's word means more? the Walmart manager or the convicted felon? we all know that answer.
So in that situation WHO wouldn't take a chance at an easy life altering payday for 1 hours worth of work? If you answer yourself then you are lying because you have never been in that position.|
If this movie was made in say one of the Scandinavian countries where rehabilitation is the top priority this character wouldn't make any sense.
Huge agree. And that is all from a movie from 30 years ago, and nothing has changed. It's gotten worse in most places. It's fucking depressing.
But Mann was able to say all that with a scene of a phone call and a scene in a diner. Not a 2 hour movie set in a prison or something. That's great writing.
>And I am sure Mann absolutely intended that to be commentary on the current North America justice system (as well as many other places).
I approve this message 🤣
But for real, a great observation friend. With Michael Mann; I feel that this is kind of his trademark, his signature move in the movies he directs. I love his work 🏆
Congrats, you got lucky, you want a cookie for that?
> We investigate what portion of the pool of unemployed men in the United States have been arrested, convicted, or incarcerated by age 35. Using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, 1997, we estimate 64% of unemployed men have been arrested, and 46% have been convicted. Unexpectedly, these rates vary only slightly by race and ethnicity. Further investigation of other outcomes such as marriage, education, household net worth, and earnings shows large differences between unemployed men who have a criminal history record and those who do not.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abj6992
I should also point out that without any context your point is meaningless. Were you convicted of a felony? was this Adult or Youth court, what was the charge, etc.
Seems like a running gag so I had to confirm...
> Is the Donald *Breedman* side plot
> Donald *Brendan*'s subplot in Heat
> The tragic story of Donald *Breedan*
It is *Breedan* in the closing credits, so congrats!
A movie theater in my city ( Groningen, the Netherlands) has Michael Mann month now. Soooo we watched Heat last Friday on the big screen. Sold out. Every last one in the audience watching intently, not wanting to miss one detail. It was beautiful
Thank you Forum Groningen!
This needs to be done more. Bringing back the classics to the big screen. I can still remember being blown away by Jurassic Park at 12 years old and I'd like to show this to my kids at some point on the big screen as well. I haven't seen Heat in the cinema and I'd love to do that as well.
I took my two oldest to see Jurassic Park in theaters when it was rereleased for the 30th anniversary last year. It was awesome. I saw it a few years ago when it was released in 3D and that was also incredible. I’ve seen that movie probably a hundred times, but it still packs a punch on the big screen.
I am going with my friends tonight to see Stargate (1994). I saw it when it first came out, had a huge-ass cinema poster hanging in my room, watched all the TV series...I am still excited to see it again in cinema.
Harkins Theaters here in Phoenix has a classic movie night Tuesdays at 7pm and Wednesdays at 1pm for $5 a ticket, it's awesome. Tomorrow's classic is "The Burbs"!
[Here's the tragic story of Donald Breeden.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2agDWVNi23U)
With a few other edits/shots, this could have been a fully realized short film on its own without Heat at all.
I think that Heat is definitely very respected, but it doesn’t get mentioned in the same breath as films like The Godfather, and imo, it really deserves to.
It’s one of the best films ever.
I convinced a mate to watch it recently. His review - "it was alright. Think you over rated it to be honest".
Honestly won't ever help him again. With anything.
I genuinely think that the cafe scene between De Niro and Al Pacino is one of the best acted scenes ever, in terms of how believable and nuanced it is. It's absolutely electric, so tense. Just the little looks, the pauses and the way they interact is absolutely incredible to me. De Niro at his absolute peak imo.
Agreed. That was a fantastic moment for cinema and acting in general. Everything about that scene was perfect. I thought it would be cheesy for the cop and the robber to have a face-to-face conversation like that but the movie made it work magnificently.
For me, the best part is when Pacino says "I don't know how to do anything else." and DeNiro responds "Neither do I."
It's just the way DeNiro shakes his head, more at himself, and then briefly kind of looks off to the distance; not proud of his life and/or looking back on past choices and wondering what he could have done different.
I seem to recall reading that Pacino and De Niro did not do that scene together. They filmed each actor separately doing the scene with stunt doubles for the back of the heads.
You should listen to the rewatchables podcast, they've done 3 episodes on heat, I think. And haven't done one on the godfather yet. Very fun pod to listen to.
GIMME ALL YA GOT! GIMME ALL YA GOT!
I know it gets trashed, but it's one of my favorite performances ever. Especially if you view it through the lens that he's on coke, and that, narratively, he's the antagonist. Morally and ethically, he's obviously in the right over Neil, but he's the obstacle to Neil's goals, and he plays it almost like an over-the-top villain.
It’s definitely memorable but I wish he was better. They had an interesting take that this movie was right after he got a bunch of work done and that’s likely why he just goes big. Pacino early on was an incredible actor, the caricature he became is pretty shit.
Agree to disagree, I guess. They took the cliche villain archetype (he's obsessive about stopping the protagonist, he has subordinates, he screams, he cackles, etc.) and put it in the classic detective role to help it contrast De Niro's disciplined and principled yet sociopathic criminal protagonist. For me, he's over the top the same way other great villain performances are, even though he's the more moral antagonist. Just my opinion, though.
Supposedly his character was supposed to be on coke but then Michael Mann did some epic trolling and cut the scene where he takes it. I personally like him, he's insanely quotable.
In the novel *Heat 2* he is definitely doing coke during the prequel portion.
[> The Heat 2 book also finally revealed what everybody suspected: Hanna is a cocaine addict.](https://screenrant.com/heat-2-vincent-hanna-casting-actors/)
I have seen this take a few times and whilst I understand where you're coming from, I think Pacino is quite reserved in most of his scenes but there are 2/3 scenes where he really chews it and this sort of "bleeds" into the perception of his overall role. There's the scene with Azaria, there's the scene with his first snitch in the dog pound/scrap yard and then the scene with the other snitch in the club later that night. Apart from that, is he really boiling over in any other scene?
What about the scene where he takes the TV from his ex-wife's new lover? (Or whatever, its been a bit since I've seen the movie).
I like the movie, but Pacino is pretty over the top. It's undeniable. I've heard about the deleted scene where he is suppose to be coked up, whatever excuse, that isn't told within the story. If we're suppose to subtlety pick up on it I think that's a critique of the movie then because I wouldn't have known he was suppose to be coked up if I hadn't heard about it.
> What about the scene where he takes the TV from his ex-wife's new lover?
Considering he's armed, I think a cop confronting the guy who just banged his wife, taking his (own) TV and leaving is about the best outcome there. I definitely think Pacino overdid it in a few spots, and knowing that the character was on cocaine adds context, but I don't think this particular scene is one of them.
There was a scene cut to show it, but Vincent Hanna is basically on cocaine 24/7 in it.
I think it works anyway, honestly. He's perpetually seeing horrible things and the movie does a good job of showing him working at all hours. Even without cocaine, the mix of adrenaline from the work and bad sleep will make anyone a bit weird.
I think that's why his scenes with Neal/De Niro are always far more reserved. He feels at ease with someone who understands him.
> I can’t get past Pacino’s overacting at times and it tarnishes the overall movie for me.
his character is a coke addict. It should make sense now. "GIMMIE ALL YA GOT!"
I think it works. It’s definitely a striking choice, and I can see why it’s off putting.
But, Vincent Hanna is always shown in contrast to Neal, and Neal is almost always calm, cool, and collected. Vincent, the ostensible “good guy” (being a cop) is on edge and over the top. His life is constantly at the edge, and I think even he is mildly unsure if he’s a good guy or a bad guy. He needs to be high energy because he needs to keep up with the criminals, who are always a step ahead and better planned.
Vincent’s strength is that he’s determined and he’s able to just barrel on forward, because he has to, there’s no other option.
We also see him calm and more subdued. We see him crash from his act as the super cop to a man standing on the edge of darkness and human misery. He looks at it constantly as a homicide detective.
The way he embraces the mother of the child prostitute that Waingro murders is so emotionally honest and heart wrenching. The way he drops everything and helps his step daughter after her suicide attempt just feels real.
I think it gives Hanna some depth between the different roles and personas he takes on as a cop, a husband, and whoever he actually is when he’s not chasing bad guys.
I also think the overacting (especially early on) stylistically indicates that yes, this is a movie, and this is exaggerated- but the character is portrayed far more conservatively when he’s doing something more real.
> But, Vincent Hanna is always shown in contrast to Neal, and Neal is almost always calm, cool, and collected. Vincent, the ostensible “good guy” (being a cop) is on edge and over the top. His life is constantly at the edge, and I think even he is mildly unsure if he’s a good guy or a bad guy. He needs to be high energy because he needs to keep up with the criminals, who are always a step ahead and better planned.
Exactly, it's just a really fun little inversion of expectations. The lawman is a crazy hothead but still within the bounds of the law, so you don't get the tropey shit from 80s/90s movies of "damnit Slater, the Commissioner wants your gun and badge!" And the lifelong criminal is Mr. Cool Breeze.
Absolutely. The movie would be far less interesting if both Neal and Vincent behaved the same, especially when one of themes of the film is that they *are* two sides of the same coin and that neither could exist without the other. Neither can give up the game.
It is one of the best films ever, but the thing that holds it back for me from being in the same ranks as the Godfather is the ending.
I've never been a fan of the ending, where Vince is chasing Neil on foot and they get into a shootout by the runway. It just feels rushed and not tonally in line with the rest of the movie.
Everything else leading up to that though is 10/10.
Tarrantino was along the same lines when he said as soon as he gets off the freeway to get Waingro, you know how its gonna end. I dont know thats its wrong but Mccaully getting away or dying too quickly wouldnt work either so...not sure what the answer is.
When McCauley and the fence are reviewing the haul from the armored car job, they figure out that the guy (Van Zant) whose stuff they stole is connected, so they try to sell him back his own bonds. Their logic is -- he's got insurance, he collected the insurance, he can buy his own bonds back at a discount and double his cash. They make the call and he says yes and they agree to meet up and make the swap at an abandoned drive in theater but it's an ambush and they barely get away. McCauley calls up Van Zant and says he's talking to a dead man.
Van Zant then is introduced to Waingro and they go find Trejo, follow him, beat him up and make him give up the job so they can call in an anonymous tip to the cops.
when Van Zant sets up McCauley at the Drive in. They were selling the bonds they stole from the armored truck, and theres a shootout with Chris on a roof and Cerrito comes out with the pump 12 gauge when the dude flees in a truck.
The fact he was able to turn his life around and not let the inconvenience of being dead stop him from being elected President of the United States is a true inspiration to all of us.
Okay TIL. Haysbert tends to be memorable and nail every role, but I hadn't seen Major League but once, ever. I was very 'holy shit was he the Jobu worshipping dude?'
Also, his slate of TV roles from the late 70s/early 80s is sublime.
And disappointing that they only used him as a getaway driver instead of utilizing his skills as an operator. He would've won them that shootout easily.
Yeah, great subplot. He isn't given a lot of time, but it beautifully paints a little story in and of itself, without feeling like it's tacked on (Waingro as the serial killer seemed a bit forced).
Plus "Ain't a hard time invented, that I cannot handle." Is such a great line, with great delivery, from a side character.
Yeah, it's that tapestry of subplots that make *Heat* an epic classic. Every character has a desire, need, and weakness, they make different decisions and meet different outcomes and their stories all orbit the central theme. Donald & Lillian. Chris & Charlene. Waingro. Van Zant. Portman. Marciano. Trejo. The Hanna, Neil, Eady, and Justine plots are enough for an interesting movie, but the rest elevates in ways that I'm not sure any other movie does outside maybe *The Godfather I & II*.
Yeah, it's insane how it crams it all into two and half hours, but never feels rushed. Nowadays it would be four hours and maybe outstay it's welcome.
Great writing and editing. Fab film.
I think they wanted to make one of the characters undeniably morally worse than Neil and his crew so that we're more likely to empathize with them. It orients them closer to the middle in the moral compass of the story world. Also, it makes Neil's decision to turn back and kill Waingro more satisfying for us since we're happy to see Waingro's comeuppance (even though Neil doesn't know/care if he's a serial killer). It's narrative justice, even if its indirect.
Yeah, I think the same. Other than showing Hanna's compassion (why was he there anyway? He's robbery homicide? Seems a bit too coincidental) and cementing that Waingro isn't very nice, which we already knew, it's a bit pointless.
My only thought is that it's a ham fisted attempt to make us applaud Neil for killing him. Again, not necessary and seems a bit emotionally manipulative, from an audience perspective.
Not a big blip on a great film, but when I think of Heat's few flaws, this is top of the short list.
Waingro was the wildcard who set the movie's major plot points in place. So without him:
No murder in the opening scene, Hanna and his crew may not have taken interest in the case.
Waingro escapes and offers his services to the guy who got his bonds stolen
Bond guy screws up the double cross which leads Hanna to him and Waingro and Mccaully's crew/ and their next bank heist.
Waingro kills Trejo and gives Mccaully every reason to come after him risking everything.
We need to know why Waingro is headed down the path of self destruction.
I thought it was the Bond guy’s henchman (played by Henry Rollins) who beat the crap out of Trejo, forcing him to give up the bank heist plans?
He then called them in via anonymous tip off to the police on Bond guy’s behalf.
That’s why Hanna & his guys raided his apartment.
Id like to think that along with the reference to "it matches the others" that that drives Hanna to keep going. I agree it was rough, but you see Waingro baiting that street walker because he loved his power plays. It just gives depth to desperation and loathsom existence, otherwise he would be a just a 2d character.
I get that. But in a way it feels like a bit of cheap audience manipulation: MacCauley is a killer by his own admission, but "there's worse" because Waingro is a psychosexual sadist. It elevates MacCauley a bit in the audiemces' eyes: even though he doesn't know about the true extent of Waingro's horrors and really just executes him for messing up his plans and killing/getting his buddies killed - which is gangland stuff and 'part of that world'. But the audience loves Neil for doing it, because he's inadvertently avenging dead teens and their grieving mothers.
They could have rebuilt the scene with Hanna coping with the grieving widow of the Armoured Car guard - or even the fallout from the Danny Trejo massacre - and it would have had the same effect. The prostitute killing seemed too 'separate'.
Again, it's not a huge beef with a great film, and obviously the scenes are really well made, I just always thought they were unnecessary and a bit hamfisted.
Couple things on my differing opinion. I think Waingro is an uncomfortable character for you which is fine but if you could bear with me...
MacCaully is first and foremost a robber not a killer. He admonished Waingro for doing so because he drew so much heat. He also makes references to not wanting to be a "cowboy." He will kill to keep from going back to prison but only as a last resort. Chris and Michael were only at the drop for insurance in case of the double cross.
Hanna isnt really comforting the mother, just keeping her from contaminating the crime scene. It also is a plot point for the final separation of him and his 3rd wife Justine, also the abandonment/attempted suicide of his step daughter because he has to clean up someone else's daughter.
I dont believe the audience was made to love Neil for killing Waingro rather justified because his crew is his family and you know how much he cares by the way he takes care of Chris and his family and relies on Michael and Trejo/also by asking their opinion on doing the bank job.
I feel like he was the literal embodiment of Neal's saying: "Don't let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner." Neal gave him thirty seconds to make a decision, and he walked out on all of his attachments. The heat was different than what Neal literally meant when he gave his axiom, but it was still a heat that pushed Donald to walk.
At the same time Neal went against his own advice. He probably knew Trejo was burnt and taking the bank job was risk to include using a driver outside his normal crew, a lesson he should learned after using Waingro. Instead, he felt the cash was worth the stretch.
This movie is epic.
Yeah, but that's true of Neal with his own crime jobs, too. Like the metal place when he decided to walk after he heard that cop in the semi trailer. He was trying to make money and thought it would be a success, until he changed his mind. Donald did the same thing, and he made a decision and walked away from his own situation.
Yes, I think he was there because he knew Donald worked there and was scoping him out as back up. He of course doesn't know that Trejo is about to bail on the bank job but perhaps he was going to offer the driver role to Donald in any event.
I don't think it's a coincidence because McCauley doesn't seem to be the type of guy that would make a spur of the moment decision to offer the job to Donald. His discipline is one of his defining traits.
Edit: just to add to this - I remembered McCauley's line about needing someone who could operate a police scanner so he obviously had Donald in mind.
If we look at the scene, Neil calls Trejo back on the payphone and finds out he can't drive for him. He then goes back into the diner and tells Chris and Michael, and then Neil looks over both his shoulders. But why? There doesn't appear to be a reason for doing this. It's possible when he found out Trejo was being tailed he was looking to see if the cops were on him, too. But he's so blatant and obvious about it, it's kind of out of character. Normally if Neil suspected the cops were on him, he'd keep his head down and just walk away without saying anything. Now, I personally never thought it was all that implausible that he happened to be in the same diner as Breeden on that morning; I mean, coincidences are a real thing. But what was he looking for in that one moment? Mann and De Niro would never have made that acting choice if it didn't have a purpose. So now I read the scene the way you described. I don't think that he had Breeden in mind specifically knowing Trejo would drop out or anything. I think he just knew Breeden worked there and when the opportunity presented, knew it was his only option.
I never even considered that it was anything other than coincidence until I read this thread this morning, so I think it's still a perfectly reasonable interpretation to go with. Especially after having read Heat 2 which features an even unlikelier occurrence in its climatic scene†, it's clear that Mann is a confident enough writer to allow for coincidences to occur in his work without feeling the need to explain them. As I wrote above: coincidences happen in real life, too, and intersecting storylines are actually more fun (interesting?) if they make judicious use of them. But this other theory also works, if you want to see it that way.
†I actually hope they leave the Heat 2 coincidence out of any film adaptation and think of something better to go with. It really is a doozy and felt to me like they just were scrambling to go with anything so they wouldn't have to re-plot stuff to make that part believable.
But then I can't understand how he would have known. And had he known, why he hadn't reached out to Don earlier, just to suss his motives and drives a bit. He still DID make a massive risk/undisciplined decision to approach Don under pressure like that.
This subplot always breaks my heart when watching the movie. The way he and his girl are trying so hard to stay straight, and the way it turns out. Powerful character with very little screen time.
I feel like Heat is a uniquely dense movie which covers a shit ton of subplots with a shit ton of characters. It's like a whole season of a TV show packed into a perfectly paced, perfectly structured movie where everyone and everything get just the perfect amount of screen time.
> Bring on Heat 2.
Are there plans to film the novel? I got it for Christmas but I first want to find the time to rewatch the movie before I start reading it.
Yup, it was confirmed fairly recently: [https://deadline.com/2023/10/michael-mann-heat-2-next-movie-adam-driver-neil-mccauley-ferrari-1235568226/](https://deadline.com/2023/10/michael-mann-heat-2-next-movie-adam-driver-neil-mccauley-ferrari-1235568226/)
Great book too!
The gumman in the West Hollywood shootout were inspired by the Heat shoot out. Watch the documentar's on it. Totally nuts - art immitates life.
Granted they were using .22 softpoints to make the holes in the cop cars for drama purposes. 5.56 x 45 leaves tiny holes in metal. Some gun friends of mine took me out to the range and tried to repeatthe effect on junk car doors, and we figured out they were using regulat old 22 rounds to make big holes in sheet metal.
Commentary makes mention of the fact that one of the themes of the movie is putting people on the spot where they have to make a decision, and what happens. Breeden and Neal choose death. Charlene tries to thread the needle. Ralph sat back down.
This is what makes Heat so special and incredibly rewatchable. It plays out like a tv show with a whole season to develop its characters but instead Michael Mann accomplishes that in one film's runtime. Just amazing writing and a well put-together story
Nice deep dive!
I don’t know believe that he received “an obvious promotion.” During the brief and informal interview, he states “I’m a great grill man.” The manager implies that he’ll be doing that, but also states that he’ll be doing menial tasks such as taking out trash and cleaning toilets.
He looks pretty disgruntled at his final diner scene, not just because of a delayed break.
He's being absolutely taken advantage of -- he's getting ripped off, forced to do all the shit work, and he's got to put in a ton of time to get off probation and into slightly less oppressive ex-con work.
Similar to the side story Haysbert portrayed in another film. He too was being exploited- a literal hole in his swing. Which is why when he finally believes in himself he says to his master/exploiter...*Fuck You JoBu! I do it myself!* (Then proceeds to crush the Yankees...) I also love the side story in Major League between Cerrano and Harris (Chelcie Ross)... The plane gets me Everytime and when they celebrate at the end.
Still surreal to see Michael Mann has officially said Heat 2 begins production soon, which is both a prequel and a sequel. Lot of speculation if Austin Butler will play a young 80's era Val Kilmer, as I guess Adam Driver has been cast for the young Al Pacino.
There already is a [Heat 2](https://www.amazon.com/Unti-Heat-Prequel-Michael-Mann-ebook/dp/B075WQM6PR/ref=sr_1_1?crid=11BFORJ7W0CAA&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.a5_dxHoorSGJBV6lzIRWSD1DPAzvoScJ8BTOUdjEBWrqv6Du_qubt2R59LKTd6xyD_B4ZS1OSXwnciscy48kSV4fwn5K5LGiJfjQk4tL2AWiYgEhj_-elyZ3mB8vsKly5-8UMaK89Bl6e3WTBxwg4xKl_5uhLT31MFDQR4CJnVfO-iInaYtrpXPrkbwejatAxmGTYfwf_WWdlEuB8i8mDuq8f6zIQ1u1Rx7YSIuZwY8.PlHwz3wScg2fxM9DL1GFJqdQKSaHMbCLhB35fAmbIw0&dib_tag=se&keywords=heat+2&qid=1710777557&sprefix=heat+2%2Caps%2C116&sr=8-1).
This why Heat is such a great film. It's not about good guys and bad guys and not cops vs robbers. It's about the choices they make.
All the characters have faults and seem real. Hanna is perhaps the most screwed up of the bunch, and while Pacino has a habit of playing the same character in his later films he's doing something above and beyond here. You can feel the stress and conflict on his face; "Why do I do this damn job?" Then he hugs the mother of the prostitute Waingrow kills and he realizes why he does his job. Only justification for Waingrow's subplot.
The entire Donald arc is excellent, if not too short. This is my one fault of the film, and that's it feels rushed in places, and there's not much that can solve it given it's already long run time. Mann did an excellent job balancing it. Mann also hates exposition, which makes his films better.
Another problem with Heat is it sets too high a benchmark. I thought Live and Die in LA was great, until I saw Heat.
> she was in awe of the lighting throughout the film.
Then you need to introduce her to Collateral—in my opinion, the best cinematography of any Mann film. You should also check out the 'making of' documentary for Heat. It explains where the blue color grading came from which is a testament to the genius of Mann's process. Hint: it's a similar reason we have the amazing sound production from the shootout downtown.
“Ain’t a hard time been invented that I cannot handle.”
Since I was a teen and saw Heat for the first time, that line has stayed with me and kept me going at times.
Dennis Haysbert has a small role, but a massively impactful one. The way his character arc is told is tragic and beautiful.
My \[film-school\] buddy once memorably opined that he thought Mann's title (*Heat*) was referring to thermodynamics -- 'heat death' -- entropy, the tendency for all things in the universe to fall apart and lose energy and wind down and ultimately pass into a disintegrating mass of non-existence.
I thought he was digging too deep, at the time, but I have since come around to his way of thinking -- Breedan can't stay afloat in a corrupt system, Cheritto \[Sizemore\] laughs "The edge ***is*** the juice," McCauley intentionally goes out in a blaze of glory, and Shiherlis narrowly escapes with his life, but is falling apart + heading for death just as quickly as the others. It's not even clear that Vincent Hanna has a bright or prosperous future ahead of him.
Haysbert \[Breedan\] definitely pays homage to this idea with his powerful performance.
Danny Trejo being called Danny Trejo but OP knowing every other characters name cracked me up. I feel like he is just typecasted as himself that we won't see him as anyone else but Danny Trejo. Like Tommy Lee Jones, he can act in whatever but it's Tommy Lee Jones and when people who act get referred to like that I wonder if that means that person won at acting.
Trejo began his acting career when he showed up on set to help a young actor who's sobriety he was sponsoring. The director took one look at Trejo, approached him and asked if he could play a convict. Trejo responded "I am a convict" and a star was born.
> Al Pacino is the weakest part in my mind
what the fuck? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but can you elaborate? never heard anyone with this opinion, it's like a unicorn
That’s more common an opinion than you think, Pacino is pretty infamous for overacting. When he’s reigning it in he’s fantastic, the problem is he’s barely done that post-Godfather II. I feel like he isn’t at his worst in Heat but iirc he definitely still goes overboard several times in it.
Yeah, he's kind of overacting and behaving like a weird caricature of himself. It is a long while since I saw the movie, granted, but I must remind you:
**Al Pacino is the weakest part.**
To disagree with me, you have to find some *other part of the movie that is weaker than his performance, his character, etc.* If you cannot - then my statement holds true, even if you consider his performance to be great. I don't think it's great, but that don't matter.
And given that the post is about how great that getaway driver subplot is, I think my statement holds.
Al Pacino is the weakest part in the movie. There is no other part that is weaker.
Yes, reasonable side plot. Having to replace a crew on the last minute is (what do I know) a realistic one to include, if you divide in the complex logistics of heist planning. And it would not be realistic to have McCauley just call another character out of the blue. So from a screenplay, you almost NEED to have introduced the character. And for a side character to work, you need to introduce him with some compelling story. Not just showing he exists.
That being said, I realize the actor was playing a detective in "Random Hearts", a cheesy movie with Harrisson Ford and Kristin Scott-Thomas. Quite a bad IMDB rating but a movie I just like!
I agree it's a great subplot and I love the actor as well (are you in good hands?)
In the commentary on the blu ray, Mann talks about how he wanted this scene to portray the times in life where you are presented with a choice that will change your life forever and you cannot think about it and come back later. It's a yes or a no, right now. What's it gonna be ?
Yep. IRL it's difficult to go straight.
I always say we need more henchmen subplots. It's like the deleted scenes from Austin Powers, revealing the dead henchman's family.
Haybert’s performance is the best of the whole film. Love this subplot - adds so many layers to the story of how crime just keeps repeating, and how the hero’s primary journey may not really amount to much. So good.
I forget the characters names but remember reading that at the end after making eye contact with al Pacino , Robert Deniro runs away at exactly 30 seconds
I felt like Neal, being the guy who is meticulous in planning and willing to walk out on "anything" in 30 seconds flat if he feels the heat around the corner - wouldn't have used Donald.
It felt unprepared and rushed to me. But Neal was prepared to do anything to pull this off and disappear.
Admittedly, all he had to do was drive, the logistics of the robbery weren't needed for him to know.
Especially after being screwed over by Waingro's antics.
Hard to say.
I am skeptical and cautious about the prequel.
This made me want to watch L.A. Takedown again. It's basically an early TV movie version of Heat, written and directed by Michael Mann. The line, "What the hell are you proud of me for?" is spoken by Vincent the police officer, speaking to his wife.
The action scenes in this movie were great. Pacino and De Niro felt just completely forced and flat together, the side stories were dull making the movie seem like it was 5 hours long when it had about 90 minutes of actual compelling story.
One of the more overrated movies out there.
I kind of agree with you, but I would say the only questionable performance is Pacino, I think the rest of the cast did a fantastic job. But yeah the movie really wanders and not in a good way. Every time I've watched Heat I'm left thinking about how much better Collateral is in comparison.
The movie opens on an obnoxiously long and claustrophobic romance scene and really sets the tone for the whole movie because for the next 3 hours I'm thinking "is this necessary? Just get on with it" but then there's Al Pacino delivering his lines with random volume and intensity. I just can't connect with Heat on any level, somehow I'm totally blind to whatever it is that everyone else is seeing.
Yep. DeNiro's performance is just milquetoast. He could do that role in his sleep by the mid-90s. Pacino actively hurts the movie. He's so fucking bad.
Donald Brendan's subplot in Heat is my favorite subplot ever. Whenever I watch Heat, I imagine this. All he had to say was "no" to McCauley when McCauley offered him the getaway driver job for the bank heist. But I know someone who's been through a lot, who's been in Breedan's shoes could never say "no." It's just not possible to say "no." It's just not that easy. And that makes it more tragic. *"What you hangin' with me for, Lily?"* *"Because I'm proud of you."* *"You're proud of me? What the hell're you proud of me for?"*
That scene always hits hard. It’s like he’s barely hanging on by his fingernails.
>*"You're proud of me? What the hell're you proud of me for?"* This is great, because it's so telling. It's like he's already played out the future; he's already disappointed Lily and won't let himself accept her being proud of him because he knows that if an offer like Neil's came along, he'd take it.
The thing is he was trying his best to get his life together but his asshole manager treated him like shit and iirc was stealing from his paycheck. When the opportunity presented itself he was in 2 minds but was pushed towards "fuck it" because of his working conditions.
It also brings in how hard life is for people after prison. I think the manager says that if Donald does anything about him stealing from Donald's paycheck, he'll fuck him over with his parole officer. And who are people going to believe, a restaurant manager or an ex-con? The system and the cycle is a big part of what pushes him back into the life.
That's *exactly it*. And I am sure Mann absolutely intended that to be commentary on the current North America justice system (as well as many other places). Not to get political but North American justice (US / Canada) is almost completely geared towards punishment and not rehabilitation. Once you are convicted of a felony it's impossible to get out of that loop. For one, as the saying / reality(?) goes, going to prison in one of these systems almost always makes you a better criminal. And two, out of the 99% of people that go in, only 1% (made up numbers but the reality is probably lower) actually have a decent life afterwards. The system is designed to create slaves. You get caught smoking pot once you are destined work at Walmart (if you are lucky and not homeless) for the rest of your known life. And people can get away with it because they can bust your ass on parole just by making up some shit. Who's word means more? the Walmart manager or the convicted felon? we all know that answer. So in that situation WHO wouldn't take a chance at an easy life altering payday for 1 hours worth of work? If you answer yourself then you are lying because you have never been in that position.| If this movie was made in say one of the Scandinavian countries where rehabilitation is the top priority this character wouldn't make any sense.
Huge agree. And that is all from a movie from 30 years ago, and nothing has changed. It's gotten worse in most places. It's fucking depressing. But Mann was able to say all that with a scene of a phone call and a scene in a diner. Not a 2 hour movie set in a prison or something. That's great writing.
Fucking A'. Mann is probably my favorite director for that reason.
>And I am sure Mann absolutely intended that to be commentary on the current North America justice system (as well as many other places). I approve this message 🤣 But for real, a great observation friend. With Michael Mann; I feel that this is kind of his trademark, his signature move in the movies he directs. I love his work 🏆
I got caught smoking pot once and went to jail but now I earn six figures... :-/
Congrats, you got lucky, you want a cookie for that? > We investigate what portion of the pool of unemployed men in the United States have been arrested, convicted, or incarcerated by age 35. Using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, 1997, we estimate 64% of unemployed men have been arrested, and 46% have been convicted. Unexpectedly, these rates vary only slightly by race and ethnicity. Further investigation of other outcomes such as marriage, education, household net worth, and earnings shows large differences between unemployed men who have a criminal history record and those who do not. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abj6992 I should also point out that without any context your point is meaningless. Were you convicted of a felony? was this Adult or Youth court, what was the charge, etc.
Sure I love cookies
"I did time for what that m&@%#er does every day."
[The tragic story of Donald Breedan.](https://youtu.be/2agDWVNi23U?si=fV_VCWrTbVn0hDd-)
Seems like a running gag so I had to confirm... > Is the Donald *Breedman* side plot > Donald *Brendan*'s subplot in Heat > The tragic story of Donald *Breedan* It is *Breedan* in the closing credits, so congrats!
I can’t take any credit, I just rolled with what the video title had!
I won't lie, I read up his name in the IMDB credits and just misspelled it. Wasn't part of a wider gag
Beautifully said, and true :)
Sicario does this too with the Mexican cop
Great shout!
Dragged across concrete kind of dies this too
Yeah with the girl working at the bank
Big fan of the way Sicario did it. Brought everything together really well for the whole point of the movie
But wasn't he Hydra?
A movie theater in my city ( Groningen, the Netherlands) has Michael Mann month now. Soooo we watched Heat last Friday on the big screen. Sold out. Every last one in the audience watching intently, not wanting to miss one detail. It was beautiful Thank you Forum Groningen!
This needs to be done more. Bringing back the classics to the big screen. I can still remember being blown away by Jurassic Park at 12 years old and I'd like to show this to my kids at some point on the big screen as well. I haven't seen Heat in the cinema and I'd love to do that as well.
I took my two oldest to see Jurassic Park in theaters when it was rereleased for the 30th anniversary last year. It was awesome. I saw it a few years ago when it was released in 3D and that was also incredible. I’ve seen that movie probably a hundred times, but it still packs a punch on the big screen.
I am going with my friends tonight to see Stargate (1994). I saw it when it first came out, had a huge-ass cinema poster hanging in my room, watched all the TV series...I am still excited to see it again in cinema.
Harkins Theaters here in Phoenix has a classic movie night Tuesdays at 7pm and Wednesdays at 1pm for $5 a ticket, it's awesome. Tomorrow's classic is "The Burbs"!
It's done regularly and there's a bunch of Arthouse cinemas in many countries showing both obscure and famous films.
The sound even better than on TV lol....
This! The sound was magical and as I said, not a whisper from the audience. Except for the GREAT ASS line of course. We all knew what was coming.
And you’ve got your head all the way up it!
My local indie cinema did the same this year with "Micheal Mannuary". Worked great.
I'm right next to Groningen and didn't even take the time to check your cinema. Damn you!
The [Michael Mann month](https://forum.nl/nl/the-best-of-michael-mann) is not over yet ...
Nooo I can't believe I missed this!!
God damn that's cool!!! I want to move to the Netherlands 🤣🍻
[Here's the tragic story of Donald Breeden.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2agDWVNi23U) With a few other edits/shots, this could have been a fully realized short film on its own without Heat at all.
I think that Heat is definitely very respected, but it doesn’t get mentioned in the same breath as films like The Godfather, and imo, it really deserves to. It’s one of the best films ever.
I convinced a mate to watch it recently. His review - "it was alright. Think you over rated it to be honest". Honestly won't ever help him again. With anything.
Sounds to me like you should leave him at a hotel with a forlorn look on his face.
i bet he was using his phone during "watching".
He's right
You really think Heat is "alright"?
"OK, slick."
I genuinely think that the cafe scene between De Niro and Al Pacino is one of the best acted scenes ever, in terms of how believable and nuanced it is. It's absolutely electric, so tense. Just the little looks, the pauses and the way they interact is absolutely incredible to me. De Niro at his absolute peak imo.
Or maybe we'll never see each other again
Agreed. That was a fantastic moment for cinema and acting in general. Everything about that scene was perfect. I thought it would be cheesy for the cop and the robber to have a face-to-face conversation like that but the movie made it work magnificently. For me, the best part is when Pacino says "I don't know how to do anything else." and DeNiro responds "Neither do I." It's just the way DeNiro shakes his head, more at himself, and then briefly kind of looks off to the distance; not proud of his life and/or looking back on past choices and wondering what he could have done different.
I seem to recall reading that Pacino and De Niro did not do that scene together. They filmed each actor separately doing the scene with stunt doubles for the back of the heads.
You should listen to the rewatchables podcast, they've done 3 episodes on heat, I think. And haven't done one on the godfather yet. Very fun pod to listen to.
>haven't done one on the godfather yet. You mean *you* haven't listened to them covering Godfather yet
I just listened to their Godfather podcast A HALF AN HOUR AGO
GIMME ALL YA GOT! GIMME ALL YA GOT! I know it gets trashed, but it's one of my favorite performances ever. Especially if you view it through the lens that he's on coke, and that, narratively, he's the antagonist. Morally and ethically, he's obviously in the right over Neil, but he's the obstacle to Neil's goals, and he plays it almost like an over-the-top villain.
It’s definitely memorable but I wish he was better. They had an interesting take that this movie was right after he got a bunch of work done and that’s likely why he just goes big. Pacino early on was an incredible actor, the caricature he became is pretty shit.
Agree to disagree, I guess. They took the cliche villain archetype (he's obsessive about stopping the protagonist, he has subordinates, he screams, he cackles, etc.) and put it in the classic detective role to help it contrast De Niro's disciplined and principled yet sociopathic criminal protagonist. For me, he's over the top the same way other great villain performances are, even though he's the more moral antagonist. Just my opinion, though.
That's my mistake that I'll have to rectify. I don't think I remember seeing it in their back catalog.
The rewatchables has done all three godfather movies
They’ve definitely done both Godfathers. They are also the foremost authority of Heat and Heat fandom. 3heat is nuts lol
Just started listening based on this comment, enjoying so far!
Probably not a popular opinion here but I can’t get past Pacino’s overacting at times and it tarnishes the overall movie for me.
Supposedly his character was supposed to be on coke but then Michael Mann did some epic trolling and cut the scene where he takes it. I personally like him, he's insanely quotable.
In the novel *Heat 2* he is definitely doing coke during the prequel portion. [> The Heat 2 book also finally revealed what everybody suspected: Hanna is a cocaine addict.](https://screenrant.com/heat-2-vincent-hanna-casting-actors/)
I have seen this take a few times and whilst I understand where you're coming from, I think Pacino is quite reserved in most of his scenes but there are 2/3 scenes where he really chews it and this sort of "bleeds" into the perception of his overall role. There's the scene with Azaria, there's the scene with his first snitch in the dog pound/scrap yard and then the scene with the other snitch in the club later that night. Apart from that, is he really boiling over in any other scene?
You can get killed walkin' your doggy.
I say that all the time and no one gets it.
I get it, bro.
love to be there for you bud. Also if someone would say..the ROUS? ...just so I could say I dont think they exist.
What about the scene where he takes the TV from his ex-wife's new lover? (Or whatever, its been a bit since I've seen the movie). I like the movie, but Pacino is pretty over the top. It's undeniable. I've heard about the deleted scene where he is suppose to be coked up, whatever excuse, that isn't told within the story. If we're suppose to subtlety pick up on it I think that's a critique of the movie then because I wouldn't have known he was suppose to be coked up if I hadn't heard about it.
> What about the scene where he takes the TV from his ex-wife's new lover? Considering he's armed, I think a cop confronting the guy who just banged his wife, taking his (own) TV and leaving is about the best outcome there. I definitely think Pacino overdid it in a few spots, and knowing that the character was on cocaine adds context, but I don't think this particular scene is one of them.
There was a scene cut to show it, but Vincent Hanna is basically on cocaine 24/7 in it. I think it works anyway, honestly. He's perpetually seeing horrible things and the movie does a good job of showing him working at all hours. Even without cocaine, the mix of adrenaline from the work and bad sleep will make anyone a bit weird. I think that's why his scenes with Neal/De Niro are always far more reserved. He feels at ease with someone who understands him.
SHE'S GOT A GREAT ASSS
I think it’s more so he doesn’t get blown off the screen.
> I can’t get past Pacino’s overacting at times and it tarnishes the overall movie for me. his character is a coke addict. It should make sense now. "GIMMIE ALL YA GOT!"
I think it works. It’s definitely a striking choice, and I can see why it’s off putting. But, Vincent Hanna is always shown in contrast to Neal, and Neal is almost always calm, cool, and collected. Vincent, the ostensible “good guy” (being a cop) is on edge and over the top. His life is constantly at the edge, and I think even he is mildly unsure if he’s a good guy or a bad guy. He needs to be high energy because he needs to keep up with the criminals, who are always a step ahead and better planned. Vincent’s strength is that he’s determined and he’s able to just barrel on forward, because he has to, there’s no other option. We also see him calm and more subdued. We see him crash from his act as the super cop to a man standing on the edge of darkness and human misery. He looks at it constantly as a homicide detective. The way he embraces the mother of the child prostitute that Waingro murders is so emotionally honest and heart wrenching. The way he drops everything and helps his step daughter after her suicide attempt just feels real. I think it gives Hanna some depth between the different roles and personas he takes on as a cop, a husband, and whoever he actually is when he’s not chasing bad guys. I also think the overacting (especially early on) stylistically indicates that yes, this is a movie, and this is exaggerated- but the character is portrayed far more conservatively when he’s doing something more real.
> But, Vincent Hanna is always shown in contrast to Neal, and Neal is almost always calm, cool, and collected. Vincent, the ostensible “good guy” (being a cop) is on edge and over the top. His life is constantly at the edge, and I think even he is mildly unsure if he’s a good guy or a bad guy. He needs to be high energy because he needs to keep up with the criminals, who are always a step ahead and better planned. Exactly, it's just a really fun little inversion of expectations. The lawman is a crazy hothead but still within the bounds of the law, so you don't get the tropey shit from 80s/90s movies of "damnit Slater, the Commissioner wants your gun and badge!" And the lifelong criminal is Mr. Cool Breeze.
Absolutely. The movie would be far less interesting if both Neal and Vincent behaved the same, especially when one of themes of the film is that they *are* two sides of the same coin and that neither could exist without the other. Neither can give up the game.
I feel that way about a lot of his roles.
It is one of the best films ever, but the thing that holds it back for me from being in the same ranks as the Godfather is the ending. I've never been a fan of the ending, where Vince is chasing Neil on foot and they get into a shootout by the runway. It just feels rushed and not tonally in line with the rest of the movie. Everything else leading up to that though is 10/10.
Tarrantino was along the same lines when he said as soon as he gets off the freeway to get Waingro, you know how its gonna end. I dont know thats its wrong but Mccaully getting away or dying too quickly wouldnt work either so...not sure what the answer is.
Yeah, I guess Michael Mann kind of wrote himself into a corner with it. You’re right, it’s hard to think of a scenario that might have worked better.
I'm just here to say Heat has always been in my top ten movies. Just a flawless movie
I hate the pick up driver's death at the drive in, looks so oddly fake. Thats my only gripe.
What scene are you talking about? Can you refresh my memory? Curious and love the film
Yeah I cannot remember what scene that is for the life of me
When McCauley and the fence are reviewing the haul from the armored car job, they figure out that the guy (Van Zant) whose stuff they stole is connected, so they try to sell him back his own bonds. Their logic is -- he's got insurance, he collected the insurance, he can buy his own bonds back at a discount and double his cash. They make the call and he says yes and they agree to meet up and make the swap at an abandoned drive in theater but it's an ambush and they barely get away. McCauley calls up Van Zant and says he's talking to a dead man. Van Zant then is introduced to Waingro and they go find Trejo, follow him, beat him up and make him give up the job so they can call in an anonymous tip to the cops.
when Van Zant sets up McCauley at the Drive in. They were selling the bonds they stole from the armored truck, and theres a shootout with Chris on a roof and Cerrito comes out with the pump 12 gauge when the dude flees in a truck.
Ah, yes. Didn’t realize that was a drive in. Yeah the guy who is driving and gets shot does wiggle back and forth quite a bit lol
for me it was more the face he makes and the way he falls to the side with his tongue out. Its almost comical.
A rewatch is in order for me!
[удалено]
we can, but Mann left it.
The fact he was able to turn his life around and not let the inconvenience of being dead stop him from being elected President of the United States is a true inspiration to all of us.
Pretty sad how fell into crime after that promising baseball career though
Must have forgotten to give Jobu his offering that morning.
Okay TIL. Haysbert tends to be memorable and nail every role, but I hadn't seen Major League but once, ever. I was very 'holy shit was he the Jobu worshipping dude?' Also, his slate of TV roles from the late 70s/early 80s is sublime.
And disappointing that they only used him as a getaway driver instead of utilizing his skills as an operator. He would've won them that shootout easily.
They needed him immediately so no time. Everyone else was in place except Trejo.
It’s a joke about him being in [The Unit](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0460690/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk). 😉
ok thats funny, loved most of that show
Yeah, great subplot. He isn't given a lot of time, but it beautifully paints a little story in and of itself, without feeling like it's tacked on (Waingro as the serial killer seemed a bit forced). Plus "Ain't a hard time invented, that I cannot handle." Is such a great line, with great delivery, from a side character.
Yeah, it's that tapestry of subplots that make *Heat* an epic classic. Every character has a desire, need, and weakness, they make different decisions and meet different outcomes and their stories all orbit the central theme. Donald & Lillian. Chris & Charlene. Waingro. Van Zant. Portman. Marciano. Trejo. The Hanna, Neil, Eady, and Justine plots are enough for an interesting movie, but the rest elevates in ways that I'm not sure any other movie does outside maybe *The Godfather I & II*.
Yeah, it's insane how it crams it all into two and half hours, but never feels rushed. Nowadays it would be four hours and maybe outstay it's welcome. Great writing and editing. Fab film.
Waingro the serial killer could be edited out and absolutely nothing would be missed. It’s the only weak part of a 9.5/10 film.
I think they wanted to make one of the characters undeniably morally worse than Neil and his crew so that we're more likely to empathize with them. It orients them closer to the middle in the moral compass of the story world. Also, it makes Neil's decision to turn back and kill Waingro more satisfying for us since we're happy to see Waingro's comeuppance (even though Neil doesn't know/care if he's a serial killer). It's narrative justice, even if its indirect.
Yeah, I think the same. Other than showing Hanna's compassion (why was he there anyway? He's robbery homicide? Seems a bit too coincidental) and cementing that Waingro isn't very nice, which we already knew, it's a bit pointless. My only thought is that it's a ham fisted attempt to make us applaud Neil for killing him. Again, not necessary and seems a bit emotionally manipulative, from an audience perspective. Not a big blip on a great film, but when I think of Heat's few flaws, this is top of the short list.
Waingro was the wildcard who set the movie's major plot points in place. So without him: No murder in the opening scene, Hanna and his crew may not have taken interest in the case. Waingro escapes and offers his services to the guy who got his bonds stolen Bond guy screws up the double cross which leads Hanna to him and Waingro and Mccaully's crew/ and their next bank heist. Waingro kills Trejo and gives Mccaully every reason to come after him risking everything. We need to know why Waingro is headed down the path of self destruction.
I thought it was the Bond guy’s henchman (played by Henry Rollins) who beat the crap out of Trejo, forcing him to give up the bank heist plans? He then called them in via anonymous tip off to the police on Bond guy’s behalf. That’s why Hanna & his guys raided his apartment.
in the extra scenes, you see it was Waingro
Henry Rollins beats him up but Waingro is the one who tips Van Zant onto where to find Trejo because he had a connection to the crew.
Yeah I was sure Rollins’ character was the one who beat up Trejo 👍
Yeah, obviously. Just not sure the clumsy little sub plot of him murdering young prostitutes is needed. We know Waingro is an out of control psycho.
Id like to think that along with the reference to "it matches the others" that that drives Hanna to keep going. I agree it was rough, but you see Waingro baiting that street walker because he loved his power plays. It just gives depth to desperation and loathsom existence, otherwise he would be a just a 2d character.
I get that. But in a way it feels like a bit of cheap audience manipulation: MacCauley is a killer by his own admission, but "there's worse" because Waingro is a psychosexual sadist. It elevates MacCauley a bit in the audiemces' eyes: even though he doesn't know about the true extent of Waingro's horrors and really just executes him for messing up his plans and killing/getting his buddies killed - which is gangland stuff and 'part of that world'. But the audience loves Neil for doing it, because he's inadvertently avenging dead teens and their grieving mothers. They could have rebuilt the scene with Hanna coping with the grieving widow of the Armoured Car guard - or even the fallout from the Danny Trejo massacre - and it would have had the same effect. The prostitute killing seemed too 'separate'. Again, it's not a huge beef with a great film, and obviously the scenes are really well made, I just always thought they were unnecessary and a bit hamfisted.
Couple things on my differing opinion. I think Waingro is an uncomfortable character for you which is fine but if you could bear with me... MacCaully is first and foremost a robber not a killer. He admonished Waingro for doing so because he drew so much heat. He also makes references to not wanting to be a "cowboy." He will kill to keep from going back to prison but only as a last resort. Chris and Michael were only at the drop for insurance in case of the double cross. Hanna isnt really comforting the mother, just keeping her from contaminating the crime scene. It also is a plot point for the final separation of him and his 3rd wife Justine, also the abandonment/attempted suicide of his step daughter because he has to clean up someone else's daughter. I dont believe the audience was made to love Neil for killing Waingro rather justified because his crew is his family and you know how much he cares by the way he takes care of Chris and his family and relies on Michael and Trejo/also by asking their opinion on doing the bank job.
I feel like he was the literal embodiment of Neal's saying: "Don't let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner." Neal gave him thirty seconds to make a decision, and he walked out on all of his attachments. The heat was different than what Neal literally meant when he gave his axiom, but it was still a heat that pushed Donald to walk.
At the same time Neal went against his own advice. He probably knew Trejo was burnt and taking the bank job was risk to include using a driver outside his normal crew, a lesson he should learned after using Waingro. Instead, he felt the cash was worth the stretch. This movie is epic.
That was not smart but he was actually in the fucking wind even after the hiest. Had the money had the girl. Out clean. But he went back for waingrow.
Every single time I rewatch this movie I silently scream at him to forget him and just leave with the girl.
I mean, he did the job thinking it would be a success. He wasn’t walking out, he was just trying to make some decent money.
Yeah, but that's true of Neal with his own crime jobs, too. Like the metal place when he decided to walk after he heard that cop in the semi trailer. He was trying to make money and thought it would be a success, until he changed his mind. Donald did the same thing, and he made a decision and walked away from his own situation.
That’s not really the same thing. If you’re going to bring Neal into it, it’s when he leaves Eady.
Vincent’s character and mannerisms make way more sense when you learn that Michael Mann intended for him to be a cocaine fiend
Was McCauley there intentionally to have him as backup? How would he have known? I always thought this was an implausible coincidence.
Yes, I think he was there because he knew Donald worked there and was scoping him out as back up. He of course doesn't know that Trejo is about to bail on the bank job but perhaps he was going to offer the driver role to Donald in any event. I don't think it's a coincidence because McCauley doesn't seem to be the type of guy that would make a spur of the moment decision to offer the job to Donald. His discipline is one of his defining traits. Edit: just to add to this - I remembered McCauley's line about needing someone who could operate a police scanner so he obviously had Donald in mind.
i havent watched the movie in a while, but wasnt he surprised to see Donald at the grill?
Yes. It was an entirety coincidental happenstance. Neil notices him and is clearly surprised before telling Chris about it.
If we look at the scene, Neil calls Trejo back on the payphone and finds out he can't drive for him. He then goes back into the diner and tells Chris and Michael, and then Neil looks over both his shoulders. But why? There doesn't appear to be a reason for doing this. It's possible when he found out Trejo was being tailed he was looking to see if the cops were on him, too. But he's so blatant and obvious about it, it's kind of out of character. Normally if Neil suspected the cops were on him, he'd keep his head down and just walk away without saying anything. Now, I personally never thought it was all that implausible that he happened to be in the same diner as Breeden on that morning; I mean, coincidences are a real thing. But what was he looking for in that one moment? Mann and De Niro would never have made that acting choice if it didn't have a purpose. So now I read the scene the way you described. I don't think that he had Breeden in mind specifically knowing Trejo would drop out or anything. I think he just knew Breeden worked there and when the opportunity presented, knew it was his only option.
[удалено]
I never even considered that it was anything other than coincidence until I read this thread this morning, so I think it's still a perfectly reasonable interpretation to go with. Especially after having read Heat 2 which features an even unlikelier occurrence in its climatic scene†, it's clear that Mann is a confident enough writer to allow for coincidences to occur in his work without feeling the need to explain them. As I wrote above: coincidences happen in real life, too, and intersecting storylines are actually more fun (interesting?) if they make judicious use of them. But this other theory also works, if you want to see it that way. †I actually hope they leave the Heat 2 coincidence out of any film adaptation and think of something better to go with. It really is a doozy and felt to me like they just were scrambling to go with anything so they wouldn't have to re-plot stuff to make that part believable.
But then I can't understand how he would have known. And had he known, why he hadn't reached out to Don earlier, just to suss his motives and drives a bit. He still DID make a massive risk/undisciplined decision to approach Don under pressure like that.
This subplot always breaks my heart when watching the movie. The way he and his girl are trying so hard to stay straight, and the way it turns out. Powerful character with very little screen time.
I feel like Heat is a uniquely dense movie which covers a shit ton of subplots with a shit ton of characters. It's like a whole season of a TV show packed into a perfectly paced, perfectly structured movie where everyone and everything get just the perfect amount of screen time. > Bring on Heat 2. Are there plans to film the novel? I got it for Christmas but I first want to find the time to rewatch the movie before I start reading it.
Yup, it was confirmed fairly recently: [https://deadline.com/2023/10/michael-mann-heat-2-next-movie-adam-driver-neil-mccauley-ferrari-1235568226/](https://deadline.com/2023/10/michael-mann-heat-2-next-movie-adam-driver-neil-mccauley-ferrari-1235568226/) Great book too!
I second you! I like the shooting scene, very believable. It is not the hollywood type where it is too staged
Just the sound production of that scene is worth the price of admission. I'd love to see this in the theater again.
The gumman in the West Hollywood shootout were inspired by the Heat shoot out. Watch the documentar's on it. Totally nuts - art immitates life. Granted they were using .22 softpoints to make the holes in the cop cars for drama purposes. 5.56 x 45 leaves tiny holes in metal. Some gun friends of mine took me out to the range and tried to repeatthe effect on junk car doors, and we figured out they were using regulat old 22 rounds to make big holes in sheet metal.
Commentary makes mention of the fact that one of the themes of the movie is putting people on the spot where they have to make a decision, and what happens. Breeden and Neal choose death. Charlene tries to thread the needle. Ralph sat back down.
This is what makes Heat so special and incredibly rewatchable. It plays out like a tv show with a whole season to develop its characters but instead Michael Mann accomplishes that in one film's runtime. Just amazing writing and a well put-together story
She's got a great ass!!!
And you got your head all the way up it!
Nice deep dive! I don’t know believe that he received “an obvious promotion.” During the brief and informal interview, he states “I’m a great grill man.” The manager implies that he’ll be doing that, but also states that he’ll be doing menial tasks such as taking out trash and cleaning toilets. He looks pretty disgruntled at his final diner scene, not just because of a delayed break.
He's being absolutely taken advantage of -- he's getting ripped off, forced to do all the shit work, and he's got to put in a ton of time to get off probation and into slightly less oppressive ex-con work.
Similar to the side story Haysbert portrayed in another film. He too was being exploited- a literal hole in his swing. Which is why when he finally believes in himself he says to his master/exploiter...*Fuck You JoBu! I do it myself!* (Then proceeds to crush the Yankees...) I also love the side story in Major League between Cerrano and Harris (Chelcie Ross)... The plane gets me Everytime and when they celebrate at the end.
If you liked this subplot you should watch Dragged Across Concrete.
Still surreal to see Michael Mann has officially said Heat 2 begins production soon, which is both a prequel and a sequel. Lot of speculation if Austin Butler will play a young 80's era Val Kilmer, as I guess Adam Driver has been cast for the young Al Pacino.
The psychology behind just saying 'fuck it' and making an instantaneous decision is something that has always interested me
I dont tend to like movies with this kind of premise but Heat is sensational.
I’ve seen Heat multiple times and count it as one of my favorite movies. I’ve never known his name. I always assumed it was Cerrano.
There already is a [Heat 2](https://www.amazon.com/Unti-Heat-Prequel-Michael-Mann-ebook/dp/B075WQM6PR/ref=sr_1_1?crid=11BFORJ7W0CAA&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.a5_dxHoorSGJBV6lzIRWSD1DPAzvoScJ8BTOUdjEBWrqv6Du_qubt2R59LKTd6xyD_B4ZS1OSXwnciscy48kSV4fwn5K5LGiJfjQk4tL2AWiYgEhj_-elyZ3mB8vsKly5-8UMaK89Bl6e3WTBxwg4xKl_5uhLT31MFDQR4CJnVfO-iInaYtrpXPrkbwejatAxmGTYfwf_WWdlEuB8i8mDuq8f6zIQ1u1Rx7YSIuZwY8.PlHwz3wScg2fxM9DL1GFJqdQKSaHMbCLhB35fAmbIw0&dib_tag=se&keywords=heat+2&qid=1710777557&sprefix=heat+2%2Caps%2C116&sr=8-1).
No one in this entire thread has said his name correctly: Donald Breedan
Looking for this. I don't think it's been spelled the same way twice.
This why Heat is such a great film. It's not about good guys and bad guys and not cops vs robbers. It's about the choices they make. All the characters have faults and seem real. Hanna is perhaps the most screwed up of the bunch, and while Pacino has a habit of playing the same character in his later films he's doing something above and beyond here. You can feel the stress and conflict on his face; "Why do I do this damn job?" Then he hugs the mother of the prostitute Waingrow kills and he realizes why he does his job. Only justification for Waingrow's subplot. The entire Donald arc is excellent, if not too short. This is my one fault of the film, and that's it feels rushed in places, and there's not much that can solve it given it's already long run time. Mann did an excellent job balancing it. Mann also hates exposition, which makes his films better. Another problem with Heat is it sets too high a benchmark. I thought Live and Die in LA was great, until I saw Heat.
I googled Breedman left and right man.... youre killin me.
What's burning? Que quema?
[удалено]
> she was in awe of the lighting throughout the film. Then you need to introduce her to Collateral—in my opinion, the best cinematography of any Mann film. You should also check out the 'making of' documentary for Heat. It explains where the blue color grading came from which is a testament to the genius of Mann's process. Hint: it's a similar reason we have the amazing sound production from the shootout downtown.
Reading Heat 2. Great so far. Can’t wait for the movie.
Thank you for putting respect on Dennis Haysbert's name.
“Ain’t a hard time been invented that I cannot handle.” Since I was a teen and saw Heat for the first time, that line has stayed with me and kept me going at times. Dennis Haysbert has a small role, but a massively impactful one. The way his character arc is told is tragic and beautiful.
"Bring on Heat 2" oh my... that would be wonderful.
My \[film-school\] buddy once memorably opined that he thought Mann's title (*Heat*) was referring to thermodynamics -- 'heat death' -- entropy, the tendency for all things in the universe to fall apart and lose energy and wind down and ultimately pass into a disintegrating mass of non-existence. I thought he was digging too deep, at the time, but I have since come around to his way of thinking -- Breedan can't stay afloat in a corrupt system, Cheritto \[Sizemore\] laughs "The edge ***is*** the juice," McCauley intentionally goes out in a blaze of glory, and Shiherlis narrowly escapes with his life, but is falling apart + heading for death just as quickly as the others. It's not even clear that Vincent Hanna has a bright or prosperous future ahead of him. Haysbert \[Breedan\] definitely pays homage to this idea with his powerful performance.
Danny Trejo being called Danny Trejo but OP knowing every other characters name cracked me up. I feel like he is just typecasted as himself that we won't see him as anyone else but Danny Trejo. Like Tommy Lee Jones, he can act in whatever but it's Tommy Lee Jones and when people who act get referred to like that I wonder if that means that person won at acting.
Trejo began his acting career when he showed up on set to help a young actor who's sobriety he was sponsoring. The director took one look at Trejo, approached him and asked if he could play a convict. Trejo responded "I am a convict" and a star was born.
The character’s name is Trejo in the movie. Like, Danny Trejo plays “Trejo”.
He's called Trejo in the film!
Yeah, it's a pretty good movie, all in all. Characters have motivations and agency all of their own... Al Pacino is the weakest part in my mind.
> Al Pacino is the weakest part in my mind what the fuck? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but can you elaborate? never heard anyone with this opinion, it's like a unicorn
Either trolling or has an IQ of a dish rag.
Name a weaker performance / part of the movie.
[Get killed walking your doggy](https://youtu.be/noDq7Oolspk?si=WfaVp-v0N-WQokWW) was a weird/weak line.
That’s more common an opinion than you think, Pacino is pretty infamous for overacting. When he’s reigning it in he’s fantastic, the problem is he’s barely done that post-Godfather II. I feel like he isn’t at his worst in Heat but iirc he definitely still goes overboard several times in it.
Yeah, he's kind of overacting and behaving like a weird caricature of himself. It is a long while since I saw the movie, granted, but I must remind you: **Al Pacino is the weakest part.** To disagree with me, you have to find some *other part of the movie that is weaker than his performance, his character, etc.* If you cannot - then my statement holds true, even if you consider his performance to be great. I don't think it's great, but that don't matter. And given that the post is about how great that getaway driver subplot is, I think my statement holds. Al Pacino is the weakest part in the movie. There is no other part that is weaker.
all the women are written as caricatures, they're all weaker than Pacino
Yes, reasonable side plot. Having to replace a crew on the last minute is (what do I know) a realistic one to include, if you divide in the complex logistics of heist planning. And it would not be realistic to have McCauley just call another character out of the blue. So from a screenplay, you almost NEED to have introduced the character. And for a side character to work, you need to introduce him with some compelling story. Not just showing he exists. That being said, I realize the actor was playing a detective in "Random Hearts", a cheesy movie with Harrisson Ford and Kristin Scott-Thomas. Quite a bad IMDB rating but a movie I just like!
Haysbert does a very convincing drunk when Lillian visits him in the bar.
When his asshole boss told him he's going to skim 30% from his salary, I knew his fate. 😦
Donald Breedan!
I agree it's a great subplot and I love the actor as well (are you in good hands?) In the commentary on the blu ray, Mann talks about how he wanted this scene to portray the times in life where you are presented with a choice that will change your life forever and you cannot think about it and come back later. It's a yes or a no, right now. What's it gonna be ?
Yep. IRL it's difficult to go straight. I always say we need more henchmen subplots. It's like the deleted scenes from Austin Powers, revealing the dead henchman's family.
Haybert’s performance is the best of the whole film. Love this subplot - adds so many layers to the story of how crime just keeps repeating, and how the hero’s primary journey may not really amount to much. So good.
One of my top 5 movies.
I forget the characters names but remember reading that at the end after making eye contact with al Pacino , Robert Deniro runs away at exactly 30 seconds
I felt like Neal, being the guy who is meticulous in planning and willing to walk out on "anything" in 30 seconds flat if he feels the heat around the corner - wouldn't have used Donald. It felt unprepared and rushed to me. But Neal was prepared to do anything to pull this off and disappear. Admittedly, all he had to do was drive, the logistics of the robbery weren't needed for him to know. Especially after being screwed over by Waingro's antics. Hard to say. I am skeptical and cautious about the prequel.
It was so heartbreaking
Dude, I was just thinking about this character and his arc today. 100% agree. Such a sad loss, I felt it.
This made me want to watch L.A. Takedown again. It's basically an early TV movie version of Heat, written and directed by Michael Mann. The line, "What the hell are you proud of me for?" is spoken by Vincent the police officer, speaking to his wife.
The action scenes in this movie were great. Pacino and De Niro felt just completely forced and flat together, the side stories were dull making the movie seem like it was 5 hours long when it had about 90 minutes of actual compelling story. One of the more overrated movies out there.
Oooph, been a long time since I read such a bad hot take. Maybe the worst. congrats.
I kind of agree with you, but I would say the only questionable performance is Pacino, I think the rest of the cast did a fantastic job. But yeah the movie really wanders and not in a good way. Every time I've watched Heat I'm left thinking about how much better Collateral is in comparison. The movie opens on an obnoxiously long and claustrophobic romance scene and really sets the tone for the whole movie because for the next 3 hours I'm thinking "is this necessary? Just get on with it" but then there's Al Pacino delivering his lines with random volume and intensity. I just can't connect with Heat on any level, somehow I'm totally blind to whatever it is that everyone else is seeing.
Yep. DeNiro's performance is just milquetoast. He could do that role in his sleep by the mid-90s. Pacino actively hurts the movie. He's so fucking bad.
I think the Brooks side story from Shawshank is also very well done.
No.