I really like HEAT -- in fact, I think it's going to be
looked at as one of the great films of the Nineties. I have a
different take on the movie, though: in my opinion it's not
the attachment to a girl that destroys De Niro's character --
it's the attachment to his way of life. I think it's made
clear that he could've escaped if he'd really wanted to, but
ultimately what he really wants is revenge. And that
ultimately kills him.
Similarly, it's clear that Pacino really only lives for the
hunt. Ultimately his current wife is going to split, leaving
him alone (as we see him at the end of the movie). Rather
than point up the characters'
"softness", what these relationships really do is point up
the characters' hardness. The difference with HEAT, I think,
is that the movie is quite critical of this hardness. In that
respect you're right, the hardboiled ethos is "undercut". Or
at least questioned.
I highly recommend HEAT. Good performances and a few great
action sequences -- the bank robbery about halfway through is
jaw-dropping.
doug
--- Philip Benz <
Philip.Benz@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
> While I would not call it a "hard-boiled film",
I
> think it's interesting
> the way it toys with (even <gasp>
deconstructs) the
> hard-boiled persona
> by focusing on each character's underlying
values
> and his attachment to
> a wife or girlfriend.
>
> De Niro, the quintessential brainy bad guy,
claims
> that
> whatever attachments to people and things you
make
> in his business, you
> have to be ready to drop them in 30 seconds and
move
> on -- a sort of
> hard-boiled mantra of self-reliance. He tries to
go
> against his timeworn
> principles and retire with a girl he's fallen
for,
> but it destroys him.
>
> Pacino and even Kilmer have their own spins on
the
> hard-boiled vs
> romantic angle, and the film as a whole spends
quite
> a lot of time on
> these emotion-laden interludes that give
the
> potentially hard-boiled
> heros soft hearts that rob them of that
title.
> There's a tension in this
> film between the two poles that I think
reveals
> things about both
> attitudes.
>
> This film left me feeling rather dissatisfied, but
I
> can't help
> wondering if it isn't because I'm too
strongly
> enamored with the
> hard-boiled/action approach for me to accept the
way
> it gets undercut.
> Unless it was just a weak film. Without De Niro
and
> Pacino with their
> usual stirling performances, would it have flown
at
> all?
>
===== Doug Bassett
dj_bassett@yahoo.com
__________________________________________________ Do You
Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
-- # To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to majordomo@icomm.ca. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 10 Feb 2000 EST