What is it with Mann and endings?

Rating: 7/10 (31 October 2004)

I saw this film tonight, at the theater. It started out pretty good, with some good dialog, some nice-looking cinematography, some good acting and some surprisingly good character development for a film directed by Michael Mann(who did Heat, which is probably the slowest moving action film that I have seen and didn't hate). Then it slowly degenerated into a typical pointless Hollywood action flick, and by the time the ending came, I was almost sure it couldn't really sink lower whilst still being so stylish... then the ending came, and it did. What is it with Mann and endings? Heat had a really anticlimactic ending as well. The film just lost any point, apart from its theme/morale, which I suppose is good enough. The plot is decent, but riddled with holes and clichés(the cop who just "knows that something else is happening here...", the stupidity of the FBI/cops) and is often poorly paced. There were also quite a few scenes that didn't seem to make any sense, but were there to show L.A. at night(which Mann seems to love) and take up time. The acting is good enough, with a few exceptions that were great... Cruise makes a great villain, Foxx a less great hero. The character are pretty much clichés and stereotypes. The villain had no redeeming qualities, but was just easy to hate. The film is stylish, and I kind of like how it(at least early on) dodges the usual ways of setting up major action scenes, and instead lets the viewer relax, sets up a scene that allows some for some nice comic relief and character development, and then let things go to hell suddenly. The humor is(apart from just surprising, considering that it's a Mann film) pretty good, natural, and not forced. Cruise and Foxx have a pretty good chemistry, and some good exchanges of dialog. Not much else to say... a fairly good film that could have been much better. I recommend it to fans of the actors and of Mann's directing style. 7/10