Michael Mann’s big-screen remix of Miami Vice, wherein he revises his pastel TV past for the Vice City present, seems to be splitting critics right down the middle. No one (except A.O. Scott) is ready to say it’s a great movie, but the gulf between Good and Awful is unbridgeable. Many wanted to be whisked back to a simpler time, when a slim, bestubbled Don Johnson roamed the earth, drug lords were our biggest problem, and Phil Collins was shorthand for bad-ass attitude. This time around, "In the Air Tonight" is revisited in a Nonpoint cover, and there’s nary a sockless loafer to be found. The mood is described as almost comically grim, as Colin Farrell and Jamie Foxx make Johnson and Philip Michael Thomas look like Laurel and Hardy by comparison.
‘Miami Vice’: Operatic Passions, Yet Cool in the Heat
The New York Times is all over Vice like a cheap linen suit. A.O. Scott climbed down from his critic cross to deliver the following sermon on the Mann: The film "transcends mere workaholism and becomes an all-consuming, almost operatic passion. Mr. Mann transforms what is essentially a long, fairly predictable cop-show episode into a dazzling (and sometimes daft) Wagnerian spectacle."
‘Miami Vice’: So dark you might get lost
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution‘s Bob Longino takes up an opposing position: "Miami Vice is a dark, grainy and heavy drama and so super-serious and smoky thick it could be called Miasma Vice." [Awwwwww, snap! When I come up with a zinger like that, I take an early lunch and a foot rub.] "Miami Vice on the big screen is not about sun, surf, fashion or Jan Hammer’s echoing drum sounds. And, no, as one of the waning summer’s last big movies, Vice isn’t the action film its marketing plan might suggest."
Kit Bowen of Hollywood.com concurs: "Gone are the pastels, the pet alligator — even Phil Collins — from this dark, gritty modern-day version of the ’80s TV show. Unfortunately, gone too is some of that fresh style that made the show unique, leaving us with just another dark, gritty crime drama."
But Scott Foundas in The Village Voice begs to differ in his review, Undercover of the Night :Violent shoot-outs and dangerous love in Mann’s visceral cop series update. Foundas likens the adaptation of the TV show to "a car that’s been stripped of everything but its two bucket seats and rebuilt from the ground up." But he digs the result, especially noting that "Mann has done something transformative with Farrell: The Irish actor has never had this much charisma and natural authority in a role, and as he navigates that gray area between Crockett’s real identity and his fabricated one, revealing subtle fissures in the character’s cocksure facade, he’s fascinating to watch."
So chalk that one up for Mann. But if regional expertise is to be trusted, this pan from The South-Florida Sun-Sentinel‘s Phoebe Flowers (whose name deserves a separate blog item) is a crushing blow:
More vice, less Miami (and fun)
"When you consider all the things the Miami Vice movie might be — a pastel-saturated wasteland, a frenetic exercise in excess, even something akin to a new Bad Boys installment — it’s surprising to discover a film that is so deeply uncool."
She goes on to call the film "about as hip as a marathon session of Uno." That’s damning on so many levels, including a personal one: In certain neighborhoods of my home borough, Brooklyn, that would be considered hip.








The previews I have seen make me think that they could have called this ANYTHING (“Vice City,” “Danger Point,” or any Seagal-esque name. Because it’s certainly not Miami Vice. Doesn’t look like it, doesn’t act like it. And I mean… WHY do you let some POS cover band take a perfect song like “In the Air Tonight” and remake it? Just for the sake of remaking it? I would have rather seen a reunion movie. Terrible terrible terrible.
What upsets me regarding the critics is that nobody mentions what for me was the biggest flaw of the movie.
It is very disjointed and once Tubbs and Crocket are on their asignment, the actual goal of the assignment, to find the mole in the task-force, is mentioned only once again and never resolved.
We find out what agency the mole is in, but not who it is. WTF!?
Otherwise, the movie for me just didn’t have a flow. THe cinematography is great as usual in Mann’s movies and I like the choice of digital-video, but overall it’s just not a great movie, which for any other director would be fine, but I expect more from Mann.
I, too, have reviewed Miami Vice – and my review comes with a report from the Miami premiere. Take a look-see: http:www.moviemartin.blogspot.com
Oops! Make that http://www.moviemartin.blogspot.com
I went to a screening of Miami Vice last night courtesy of ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY, & let me thank you that I didn’t pay to see that movie. I agree that the cinematography was nice, & the movie in itself was not terrible, but seriously, but it does leave me with alot of questions.
Why call the movie MIAMI VICE when almost none of the movie actually takes place in Miami except perhaps the beginning and the end. The rest of the movie takes place in either Havana, Cuba or some undesirable South American locale.
I was never a fan of the TV series, so maybe someone else can tell me, did Don Johnson’s character also use the alias Sonny Burnett in the television series as Colin Farrell uses in this movie, instead of going by Sonny Crockett?
Anyways, the movie would probably have gotten better reviews had Michael mann not named it Miami Vice, which incidentially, doesn’t even appear on the screen til the very END of the movie, as the credits roll…..
Phil: Yes, since he was working undercover, Crockett used the name Sonny Burnett as his alias.
I was at the EW screening here in Dallas and I agree, if he wouldn’t have called it Miami Vice, it probably wouldn’t have disappointed people just as much. But it still would have had the problem of not answering the main question their whole operation was supposed to be about. Who is the mole????
Thank you Martin!
My guess would be the mole’s identity will be revealed in the outrageously expensive sequel!
Will someone get the word out to remake the movie properly with don johnson and Philip Michael thomas before they become too old to do it.
The chemistry of the original series came from those actors and cannot be created without them.
THERE IS STILL TIME>
rzlxtj vnsqwb vcmt wchaosx cozbgs zmntpef eyfrk
rzlxtj vnsqwb vcmt wchaosx cozbgs zmntpef eyfrk
I’ve been searching in google for some items and fortuitously found your popwatch.ew.com website. Thanks for sharing this information. I find it very informative as I have been studying a lot lately on practical matters such as you talk about.