My rule of thumb is simple. Directors who make movies I love are awesome. Directors who make movies I hate are crap.
Which makes Michael Mann horribly difficult. To wit:
Public Enemies (Boring, characters unlikeable [How do you make Johnny Depp unlikeable!?!])Mann has ONE film I love without qualification. One. Normally, that relegates him to the crap category with an even-a-broken-clock-is-right-twice-a-day caveat.
Miami Vice (Like, but only ironically; if Colin Farrel and Jamie Foxx weren't reinventing Don Johnson and Phil Michael Thomas' Crockett and Tubbs I wouldn't care)
Collateral (LOVE)
Ali (Hate, too long)
The Insider (Boring, predictable)
Heat (Hate, good action, awful dialogue, relies too much on Deniro and Pacino as icons, also too long)
The Last of the Mohicans (Like, saved by the soundtrack and DDL)
Manhunter (LOVE, saved by Peterson and Cox)
The Keep (Haven't seen)
Thief (Haven't seen, music by Tangerine Dream)
But.
He does Collateral so well. Shots are sparse, dark, and absolutely capture Los Angeles in a Blade Runner-esque dystopian vision using only location and natural lighting. Music perfectly suits every scene (I especially love the night club shootout). Colors are somehow muted while still conveying LA's neon gilt.
Granting a smidgen of hyperbole here, I would venture to say he's technically flawless in every single one of his movies.
And yet they all suck.
Mann has two irritating habits qua director: (1) Inability to kill darlings, and (2) Mind-boggling screenplay choice. Collateral is tight for a Mann film, clocking in at 2 hours. Did Ali, Insider, and Heat all really need to be 160+ minutes? Did we really need each one of those scenes exposing the characters to be...exactly what we already knew them to be? And the writing in Collateral is superb; it's hard to believe Mann liked the script. There's a serious clash of worldviews, existential angst, excurses about music (which always point back to the main ideological clash), a sympathetic main character and a charming villain (how novel!). In Collateral, Mann's technique serves a fantastic story. Most of his films feature an orgy of detail, technique for the sake of technique, and feel like a love letter to film-making rather than a conscious effort to entertain.
I am simply at a loss.
And for the record, every time David Fincher makes another movie, I feel him slipping into the Mann zone.
The thing with Mann is this: No one does mood and atmosphere better. This is what was frequently cited as the best feature of Miami Vice (the series), and nearly all of his films rely heavily on it. A great example is the final montage in Miami Vice (the movie). There is really no reason to care about the characters (indeed, they don't much seem to care themselves), but Mann, through the expert use of music, color schemes, and locations, pulls us into the moment by creating a powerful mood. In a sense, the man is an expert music video director with a Hollywood budget.
ReplyDeleteTo really enjoy his films requires that the viewer bring three things to the experience:
1.) A preference for films rich in technical detail and flawless execution. You acknowledge that Mann delivers this almost without exception, but my point is that, in order to consistently enjoy Mann's work, you have to deeply enjoy this sort of thing as an end in itself. In particular, all gun fights done by other directors are incredibly boring to me because my standard has been set by Heat.
2.) As indicated above, you must be seeking a movie that creates rich atmosphere and sweeping moods. Mann's stories are generally somewhat workmanlike, but they are intended as vehicles to frame his 'mood moments'.
3.) You have love the subject matter with which he deals. If you are not already really intersted in cops and robbers, then you will not be made interested by DeNiro and Pacino in Heat. They deliver phenomenal performances of characters that, in a sense, we already know. And many of the conflicts and themes are familiar as well. If, however, you are interested, then you will likely love his films, because he tends to take a genre, subject, or character archetype, and, through the aforementioned excellence in technical skill and mood-setting, create a version that is operatic in scope and feel.
One common thing on message boards is that, for people who like crime movies, Heat is often ranked with Godfather and Goodfellas, if not above. This is because, if you already love the crime genre, 160 minutes of epic narrative, expertly detailed characters, and thrilling set-piece gun fights is not 'too long' but, rather, just right.
Anyways, if you don't bring those three things with you to the viewing, then you will almost certainly not enjoy most of his films. Collateral is definitely the most friendly to non-initiates, so your post makes total sense.
Personally, my favorite thing about Mann's direction is that he creates characters who have fully developed backstories, and who, when we join them in their lives, seem fully shaped by those backstories. This may be why Public Enemies feels so dead. Without the opportunity to create his own characters from whole-cloth, Mann fully gave himself over to the history and, in so doing, put out a high-budget A & E special.
My only question is whether or not this means I should "respect" Woody Allen, or let him remain consigned to the crap heap.
ReplyDeleteMaybe all the directors I hate are actually really good, but just find interesting what I find mundane? Mayhaps my rush to judgment is premature? Perhaps I have been too opinionated, assigning objective categories in a field of subjective taste?
Nah.