MovieChat Forums > L.A. Takedown (1989) Discussion > Heat: The ultimate remake

Heat: The ultimate remake

posted 20 years ago by A_Ziegler
17 replies | jump to latest

Man, was I dissapointed watching this! I thought like: "OK, it has to be worth watching, it's even the same director as in Heat, and Xander Berkeley is usually not half bad." But Noooo. Firts of all. The worst thing about LA takedown are the actors. They're so flat! They can't deliver their lines in the correct emotional state. I'm thinking of McArthur, who more or less just reads his lines from top to bottom.

Another thing is that Heat is filmed bigger. This is, of course, because this is a TV-movie and Heat was filmed for the big screen. Before I saw this movie I was like: "No good can ever come from a remake". Well, Heat has proven me wrong!

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] harry_m0nks_funk 20 years ago

Well A Ziegler you should thank your lucky stars that there's people like wendellgeel here to point out the error of your ways, i mean imagine the audacity of having your own opinion especially when it's not the same (and therefore of no consequence) as wendellgeels. To start of a post with "Your an idiot" (sic) and end it with "Open your mind son" is comic genius, if only it was intentional.
So if wendellgeel thinks your are an idiot then you must be cos he knows what he's talking about....no really he does!

[–] lecleaner 20 years ago

Please..... the moron that is wendel can't even spell Di Niro much less critque a film.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ryankent_afi 19 years ago

I think it's common knowledge that Heat is a much better film than L.A. Takedown. And you think that Alex McArthur is better than De Niro (spelt correctly)? Do you even know what you're saying there?

But at the end of the day wendellgee1 must be right, after all he named a lot of independent movies to show off he's a true cinephile. Being pretentious is the way forward and this guy is way up front.

But why oh why did he put Segal in the same sentence as Kevin Spacey? He'll be comparing Jean Claude Van Dam to Marlon Brando next.

[–] MichaelRAllen 19 years ago

I want to say that Heat is a great movie and probably in my top ten. To compare Heat a well written, thought provoking, action packed film with Waterworld is in my opinion a mistake. Two different genres two different directing styles (was there a directing style in Waterworld Im not sure) and two different stories.

I think that anyone reading this forum should realize what LA Takedown is a first run and a lead up to Heat.

[–] rogerscorpion 18 years ago

Ryan--since his post was deleted, I must ask: was he referring to George Segal(as spelled) or Stephen Seagal?

Carpe Noctem

[–] waterontheknee 19 years ago

A few things I found hilarious:
Bigger definitely ain't better look at big films like Titanic, Pearl Harbour, Waterworld, Wild Wild West

You put the biggest movie of its decade in with some of the biggest flops (waterworld and wild wild west were not financially successful in the least.)
While Pearl Harbor did gross over its budget, it fell quite short of what the movie was aimed for.
However, Titanic, while I cannot say it is my favorite movie, it was VERY well done, and it grossed over 600 million dollars, so calling Titanic crap is absurd.

As for actors Stallone, Segal, Spacey, Wayne, Clooney, Pitt all got somewhere does that make them any good hell no. It’s all about looks, marketing and luck.
Might I remind that you Stallone(with the exception of Rocky which he was nominated for), Segal and Wayne are all action movie stars. And you're putting them in with George Clooney (who is a brillant actor and director) and Kevin Spacey (Two time oscar winner best supporting actor for "The Usual Suspects", best actor in a leading role for "American Beauty"). Brad Pitt, well I don't really know what to think of him, but I definately would not categorize him with Stallone and Segal.

So you can not like something, but don't take things out of context (or your ass), and please, PLEASE know what you are talking about.

[–] DamianIMDB 19 years ago

Not a big Heat fan myself, felt bit empty after watching it the first time, one of those films that promised too much imo! I still rate it but feel there are better heist films, better De Niro films, better Pacino films etc etc etc. I do thoroughly enjoy it now i've seen it loads though, strange how some films are like that. I agree with the common perception that LA Takedown isn't as good as it's later clone but as has been mentioned, it's all in the budget, acting and production values.
I have to add that Titanic was AWFUL!!! Dissect it as much as you like, yes it made billions, yes the production was excellent, the actors could act, it looked great, it recreated the age well, great director etc etc. It is still awful and I would struggle to watch it all the way through. (Could be because of the C Dion soundtrack though!)

[–] gregmays 19 years ago

Probably the most important thing about 'Heat' from the perspective of the heist genre, is that the POV is balanced between the cop and the crook. We're never quite sure who we're rooting for in the film. The distance between the cop and the crook isn't that great, and in fact, they're a lot alike. And they both see that and respect each other.
I don't think any crime film made both the cop and the crook co-protagonists the way that Heat did. The first time you see it, you try to focus on the plot, and it comes up a little off-balanced. In subsequent viewings, you learn to focus on the characters. The movie is really just about Hanna and McCauley, and how their lives have come up short because of the work they choose. And they understand that about each other.

[–] HawksRevenge 18 years ago

This makes me laugh!, this TV movie was made in 1989 and Heat was made in 1995; the actors in this film do the film justice. One of Heat's biggest problems is the "Hammy" way Al Pacino delivers his lines and it comes across after seeing this film like he saw the earlier film and is just mimmicking the earlier film

L.A Takedown was not picked up because the actors Alex McArthur and Scott Plank had no interest in doing a series.

The Region 2 and Region 4 DVD's are lousy there is shadowing and the film goes in and out of focus like a bad copy

Heat in my opinion was a good film, but don't investigate it too closely or the seems start to show. All Michael Mann did was extend a 93 minute movie to an extremely long 171 Minute film

[–] vasu-1 18 years ago

Actually he took a 171 minute film and cut it to 93 minutes.
(That's right: he wrote a long screenplay, but cut 60% because it was too much for the TV pilot)

... ...

[–] FEF312 18 years ago

In the "Heat" 2 DVD disk set, Michael Mann admits that he took "40%" of the "Heat" screenplay, and used it to create "LA Takedown". Mann did this because he wanted to work with the material, and the TV Movie/Pilot was his best opportunity at the time. "Heat" and "LA Takedown" were both based on the same true event - a 1960's robbery in Chicago which went badly wrong, leading to a street battle between the robbers and the police. (See my post below for add'l details).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113277/board/thread/65421423

[–] jdreck 17 years ago

That's the difference for big budget and small budget movies, especially a small budget tv movie.

...the number you have reached -911- has been changed to an unlisted number...

[–] Movie_Piranha_1979 15 years ago

Heat is better than LA Takedown because is the translation of a tv movie to the big screen. Of course, also has a better screenplay and cast.

Prostitute: What the *beep* are you doing?
Johnny: I'm gonna kill a bunch of people.