'Miami Vice' -- High-Def Digest review

[PeterB]

Checked out Universal's latest:

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/miamivice2006.html

My apologies to fans of the film, I was a little disappointed. I expected the film to be a bit more fun and at least comprehensible.

Anyway, while the disc is quite packed with extras and I like some of the U-Control exclusives, I hated the shot-on-video look, and the poor dialogue reproduction on the soundtrack. A real mixed bag, this one...

[Konrad]

I saw it in a movie theater and the theatrical presentation was marred with the same imperfections as the HD DVD according to the review. It really didn't look like cinema but like TV projected on a huge screen. Maybe it was the idea since Miami Vice was originally a TV series but it definitely was not a good idea, the film looked awful.

[gregsuarez]

I saw this in the theaters and was very anxious to do so. I am one of the fervent Michael Mann fans that admire his suspense/thriller work (except "Ali" which I didn't see because, really, who cares...and "The Last of the Mohicans" because it feels like a movie that should have been directed by Ridley Scott or Edward Zwick). While I enjoy the original "Miami Vice" series for what it is, I was a bit let down by the film version for the very reason Peter noted: It was hard as hell to follow, especially given that the plot is hazy, the characters mumbled and most of the key lines of exposition were given by lower-tier actors with thick foreign accents. I sure wish Mann could have talked Edward James Olmos into reprising his role from the TV show, but supposedly Olmos was not interested in doing it.

That said, I really dug the gritty cinematography, which, for me, was enhanced by the use of the HD photography. While I still prefer 35mm, the visual style of a movie like "Miami Vice" is enhanced (for me, at least) by this method. My favorite scene of the film, visually, is near the beginning when Crockett and Tubbs pull over a suspect or an informant (I can't remember) on the side of a highway at night. The three characters are standing under a street light on the side of a dark road and there does not seem to be any other source lighting them. The shot looks completely natural and believable with the three men bathed in the orangish-yellow glow of the street light. My understanding is that digital photopgraphy is a lot friendlier to use in low-light situations than traditional film stock. This is a reason Mann used HD for "Collateral" given that most of that film was shot in almost complete darkness.

[HovhannesB]

Wow, is it really that bad or does this fall into the "matter of opinion" catagory? I was really looking forward to this. ie, if you actually liked the movie in the theatres, will you be impressed with the movie in High Def?

[Tejstar]

Ouch 2 stars for the film and doesn't even seem like a reference disc either. Glad I didn't blindly pre-order this then!

[HovhannesB]

Originally Posted by Tejstar

Ouch 2 stars for the film and doesn't even seem like a reference disc either. Glad I didn't blindly pre-order this then!

You gotta remember though that the reviewer doesn't like the film or the directory, to begin with.

[casper77]

I don't know but I don't agree with Peter in his review of Miami Vice. The movie looked very good and natural overall. The sound was outstanding too. It did not have that overprocessed feel sound films have now this days. Overall the soundtrack was very natural. That is my opinion of course.

[Gotchaa]

The HD DVD was a replica of the theatrical presentation. As such, it should be reflected in the review. This is artistic preference of the filmaker, it shouldn't be judged based on what the best looking HD DVD is, it should be judged based on it's representation of the theaterical presentation "." Save the commentary to commentary. Video should not be rated as low as it was. If that is the way it's going to be done there should be another barometer to measure comparative video quality.

[dkny75]

Originally Posted by Gotchaa

The HD DVD was a replica of the theatrical presentation. As such, it should be reflected in the review. This is artistic preference of the filmaker, it shouldn't be judged based on what the best looking HD DVD is, it should be judged based on it's representation of the theaterical presentation "." Save the commentary to commentary. Video should not be rated as low as it was. If that is the way it's going to be done there should be another barometer to measure comparative video quality.

Sorry Peter but I'm going to have to agree with them here. It sounds like your dislike for the look of the film and Michael Mann leaked into your review of the video and sound since you did say it was representative of the theatrical release.

[irascian]

Originally Posted by Gotchaa

The HD DVD was a replica of the theatrical presentation. As such, it should be reflected in the review. This is artistic preference of the filmaker, it shouldn't be judged based on what the best looking HD DVD is, it should be judged based on it's representation of the theaterical presentation "." Save the commentary to commentary. Video should not be rated as low as it was. If that is the way it's going to be done there should be another barometer to measure comparative video quality.

I totally disagree. Appalling theatrical presentations is one reason why I avoid the cinema these days and I would NOT want a DVD or HD-DVD to reflect that. I expect a video comparison to be made with comparative titles. If it's blurry, soft, lacks contrast, or colour I don't care if the original presentation had the same faults.

One movie I saw at the cinema was "Brokeback Mountain" (a horrid yellow print with judder in several places, and it was a pre-release screening!). That was a wonderful DVD but a dreadful theatrical presentation.

I saw "Pan's Labyrinth" at a special director Q&A screening at the NFT. Loved the film but if I thought the HD-DVD was going to be as dirty, juddery and dark and impenetrable as the print I saw I'd steer clear of the DVD and HD-DVD, and I'd be well pissed off if a review gave it high marks for video making me decide to buy it, only to find out it was as bad as the theatrical presentation had been.

[Aodh]

Perhaps a Cinematography rating and a PQ rating. Obvious encoding errors would count against the PQ rating while artistic presentation like Grain, Contrast (Blown out colours) or Camera Usage would count towards the Film rating, not the Medium rating.

[snipsnapsappy]

I watched the beginning couple of minutes and the boat chase looked incredible with vibrant colors. the nighttime scene looks gritty. Definitely not like Kong. However, the daytime scenes look so good that I am sure people who come over to check out HD on disc will be very impressed. Also, it is definitely an upgrade over the SD side.

[The Bandit]

One movie I saw at the cinema was "Brokeback Mountain" (a horrid yellow print with judder in several places, and it was a pre-release screening!). That was a wonderful DVD but a dreadful theatrical presentation.

I highly doubt that the print you saw was what Ang Lee wanted presented. The HD DVD shouldn't be compared to a bad theatrical presentation, but rather a good one.

Not all films are meant to look slick and sleek -- many are intentionally made to be grainy, dirty, etc etc etc. HD DVD/Blu-ray/DVD/35mm prints should all have the same goal in mind: to accurately represent the original film.

I'm going to pick up Vice this weekend. I loved the look and feel of the film theatrically, I'll certainly chime in here with my thoughts on the HD DVD when I watch the director's cut.

[Snookie]

Well I found 1 copy left at Best Buy for Miami Vice, and Superman Returns so I picked up both.

I personally enjoyed Miami Vice. I never really watched the series until I got Season 1 on DVD. I also knew ahead of time that the movie really wasn't going to have much to do with the tv show. I also like Michael Mann films. I think thats either a love/hate relationship you have with him.

I haven't watched the whole movie yet, but I was surprised to see they added a scene to the beginning to explain the nightclub scene. I remember sitting in the movie theater wonder what the hell is going on, and why are we here?

The video to me did look a bit grainy in some spots. It doesn't have that look like King Kong or MI3 have, but its still pretty good. Maybe thats just the difference between film/digital. This is on my ol 1080i Toshiba so maybe its just me.

[pjarvi]

I loved the style of this movie and also the music, but I have yet to purchase a combo disc and don't plan to anytime soon.