This review may contain spoilers.
1. Ok first, this film is outrageous and completely over the top. The violence. The shoot out. The big asses. The fact that Pacino and De Niro literally sit in a coffee shop together, and then we still get 90 more minutes of Pacino trying to capture De Niro. It’s a time capsule of the 90s and the classic super-widescreen, telephoto lens heavy “epic” film.
2. Noir has always used what a man “does” (their profession, their family life) to explain who a man is.
Heat uses this noir trope to explain that a job, a role, more shapes fate than anything else. De Niro can’t do anything BUT drive to that hotel to go for Waingro. Pacino’s stepdaughter attempts suicide and he can’t do anything BUT dance down the stairs of the hospital on his way to catch De Niro. Cops are cops, and robbers are robbers. As time goes on and men get older, in many ways, we actually do not grow and change for the better, but remain stuck in our trivial tendencies.
I also think the foil nature of De Niro and Pacino shouldn’t go unnoticed, where each views the love interest in their life as completely different from every other element.
A ying-yang, where Pacino is the white, and his treatment of his wife as the little dark spot. He works for the purpose of the greater good but suffers from the ability to even communicate his thoughts, concerns, feelings with his wife. For DeNiro, it is the opposite. He can only really open up to Eady, the single white spot.
What makes this movie fun has (something) to do with the action sequences. What makes this movie hold up after almost 30 years is its commentary on masculinity and whether discipline –and the honor that comes with the commitment to it– is inherently destructive or instead necessary for a feeling of purpose. Both men stick to their discipline for a majority of the movie, and it results in so much turmoil. Is the only other place for purpose in life in family/relationships? If one attempts a balance between purpose in family and profession, will they find success, fulfillment, happiness? Does that fulfillment equate to the purpose found in the discipline Pacino and De Niro stick to? I’m not sure I have answers, but I definitely have plenty of questions.
Watched at the Cinematheque with Ryan Ritter, Patrice Tandifor, and Sean Van Besouw.
The Forbidden Room: Can A Deranged Film Still Be Hilarious Amid Its Own Nonsense? (A Review)
This was my first Guy Maddin film, and regardless of the mixed feelings after watching The Forbidden Room, this won’t be my last. This 2015 Canadian low-budget experiment is amorphous, a string of short stories, in which the next one...
Read MoreThe Invite: I Hope My Dinner Parties Don’t Look Like This When I’m Older (A Review)
Joe and Angela are married. Joe (Seth Rogen) is a music teacher, eager to get a head start on his lengthy bicycle commute home, telling his orchestra to “practice a few more times” on his way out. Angela (Olivia Wilde)...
Read MoreLawrence of Arabia: An Epic That Justifies It’s Runtime with It’s Commentary
It’s been a couple of months since I got a chance to watch this in one sitting, and it still resonates on a near-daily basis. Probably my favorite “character study,” or at least showcase of a character who is never...
Read MoreScorsese Finding His Most Creative in “Killers of the Flower Moon”
This review may contain spoilers. “The most personal is the most creative.” This film school 101 Martin Scorsese quote (which got even more popular when director Bong Joon Ho shouted it out during an Oscar winning acceptance speech) was the...
Read More
