Thumbs down for Universal's Miami Vice

HD-DVD Players
HD-DVD Software

The mumbled sound is, I believe, inherent to the original film. I remember hearing a number of reviews when the film came out which complained that the dialogue was inaudible.

sheesh

1) Wrong forum.

2) Did you see the movie in the theatres? I didn't, but according to the reviews:

"Miami Vice is a highly stylized film."

"The way he shoots the night, letting you see the film grain"

"Shot on high-definition digital video, the cinematography in Miami Vice is so grainy, dull and blurry; it has the appearance of a 15-year-old VHS tape that's been played at least 100 times."

"The depth of focus, the intensity of colors, and the grainy, smudged finish of some of the images combine to create a look that is both vividly naturalistic and almost dreamlike."

From a theatrical reviews of which I saw the same in the theater.

"The digital camerawork gives Miami Vice a grainy, gritty look and a raw, rough around the edges texture that is perfectly suited for this edgy film about extreme characters stuck in equally extreme situations. The digital cameras also allow Mann some incredible depth of field during the night scenes so that we can see exactly what is going on during night time raids or drug runs where it would have been a murky mess with film stock."

and

"There's a noticeable absence of red in Miami Vice, with blues being amplified. Contrast is low in many night scenes, with noticeable grain. Whether these stylistic choices benefit Miami Vice is open to debate, but they give the film a distinct look. In many ways, the movie has a dirtier, grittier feel than its TV counterpart. The '80s Miami Vice was pastels; the 2006 version is dark and at times almost monochromatic. "

They can call it stylized, director's choice, artistic license or cow turds. This sort of thing WILL NOT IMPRESS people with HD movies. You can flame me for this, but I'm sorry this does not impress J6P and again will not make them convert to HD-DVD or BD for that matter.

J6P? I thought that was what King Kong was for. All those tvs are in torch mode at BB anyway, show em the sundrenched scenes then. The topic of this OP was questioning the encoding with VC-1..

From that review in which Mann is referred to as an "*******." wtf

"To be fair, Universal's 2.40:1 widescreen 1080p/VC-1 transfer is like the best 'Miami Vice' is going to look on home video, and is accurate to the theatrical presentation I saw."

So?

If J6P, as this phantom consumer is so disparagingly referred to on this forum, is unwilling or unable to be educated about the art of film-making, I don't think he'll see much reason to upgrade to HD in the first place. Sure, maybe he already has HDTV, but if "J6P" doesn't care about movies enough to know what "stylized" means, I can't see him dropping $500 - $1000 on an HD player when he can buy a DVD player for $50. For someone who likes to watch movies but doesn't necessarily care deeply about them, DVD is still a fantastic format. I think we lose sight of that on this board sometimes.

If all creative endeavours were untaken with the notion of not alienating the masses, we'd be living in a very dull world indeed.

Not flaming you, just explaining...

Michael Mann's primary goal with 'Miami Vice' was not to make J6P convert to HD-DVD or Blu-ray. There is advertising out there for that job. Instead, he wanted to make a film that drew viewers into its gritty and violent world.

The way the film was shot often feels like watching an episode of 'Cops'. Half the time I forgot I was viewing a fictional movie. More often than not, it felt like the camera was a fly on the wall, documenting action that was going down rather than scenes being staged for a movie. There was a rescue scene at night that was shot with a green-ish tinge, making you feel like you're spying on the events with night-vision goggles.

When Spielberg made 'The Color Purple', he filmed it like looking like a gorgeous Disney period piece, which robbed the story of its grit and realism. Thankfully, Michael Mann didn't make the same mistake with 'Miami Vice'. For it to have been be shot as a HD demo reel would have been a big mistake, making the story less involving.

Sanjay

As noted above, the "gritty" look was intended and just the way the film was in the theater.

I saw it in the theaters and I can tell you the HD DVD looks just like it did in the theaters. As a matter of fact, when I was watching it at the theaters the first thing that came to my mind was this is not going to shine on HD because of the amount of digital noise in the picture. Yes, it was that bad in some night shots.

HD DVD or VC1 can't change the fact that this movie is very noisey.

So this is a great HD DVD as it mirrors the theatrical presentation quite well. Isn't that all anyone can hope for?

watched this movie last week. Very bad movie IMO. Definitely not worth purchasing on any format.

I saw it in the theatre and it had more grain than a silo. Some scenes were so grainy than from a different camera angle it was perfectly clear. Then back to the other camera angle and I could hear the cows in the background there was so much grain again. Made it look like it was a mistake in filming. Terrible movie IMO.

I knew this was coming back on 10/16/2006:


I posted that back in October so that when Gary Murrell said, "we are getting exactly what we are supposed to see", he'd have back up .

What does Kingdom of Heaven have to do with anything? The look of Ridley Scott's epic is completely different from Mann's gritty Miami Vice.

I take it you haven't seen Miami Vice in theaters? It's a noisy movie, that's just the way it was shot. In fact, you can download Apple's 1080p trailer for Miami Vice and you will see that this is just how the movie looks. Accept it.

Is anyone really suprised that a Michael Mann movie doesn't lend itself well to being a 'reference' title for HD?? Michael Mann shoots all his movies in a stylized sense; often with a TON of grain. Heat and Collateral are two great examples of this. While I personally have not seen Miami Vice, all the reviews of the HD DVD which may knock his STYLISTIC choices state that this release is true to the theatrical presentation. End of story.

So?? Considering the movie itself didn't get high marks, it's an obvious rental. I don't see the back and forth in this thread.

Nicely put.

Thankfully not every film is meant to look like a chocolate box lid.

Michael Mann is a genius you creatively challenged pygmies.

I do like it though when stylised films show up the majority of "seasoned" reviewers as the back garden simplistic fanboys they are.

I never said his goal was to convert people to HD and I realize MM has a tendency to do this to his movies. I'm just stating what the obvious will be to the average consumer, i.e the mass audio not A/V experts.

How many times do we see threads that say, "Why am I still seeing black bars?" Again the intentional grain that is added will just keep the average consumer asking, "How is this better than my SD DVDs?"

No shitt but you can't blame HDDVD.

Art

Nor was I blaming it on HD-DVD.

If you didn't see the film in theaters you really can't judge what it is supposed to look like. Some films will get a tremendous boost visually on HD DVD and others simply will not. I am starting to realize that running out and buying everything released is a big mistake. Some of these films would be just as pleasurable to watch in SD DVD at half the cost. It is also a good habit to read about half a dozen reviews before taking any one reviewer's opinion. They are human and self anointed experts in many instances. I have disagreed with Peter Bracke's reviews over at HD Digest at least as much as I have agreed with him.

I also think it is an absolute shame when a director makes choices that leaves the audience detached. Director's that tend to have an 'over-stylized' technique tend to get in the way of what makes a great film: STORYTELLING. Few of these films will ever be regarded on the same level as motion pictures of decades past. You know, when the images and dialog were crystal clear and the camera was used to properly frame a shot rather than jerking around like a hand held. It's trendy and ridiculous. Just my opinion.

LOL, kinda harsh but I agree. Many of these uneducated will knock 'Casablanca' because it isn't in color and not widescreen.

I'm trying to picture what you guys are talking about....

Bottem line :

Does the film warrant an HD format purchase, or will the DVD version look just as good?

I went to MovieStop today to pick this up and was told it was delayed by the studio (combo disc only). Can anyone confirm availability at retail?

It seems odd that some people expect EVERY HD-DVD title to be a reference, show off to your friends, rope in J6P presentation. With Miami Vice, if you saw the movie in the theatre than you already know what to expect. You own an HD-DVD player then you obviously buy the HD-DVD, be it reference or not we already know that it will the best presentation of the movie your going to get.

If you own and HD-DVD player and a movie comes out that you want that is either a recent flick or one you simply don't own are you really going to pass it up because some say's its not a reference title? Again it is still the best presentation your going to get at this point and time. Some folks man would bitch if they were GIVEN a million dollars.

Mann shot the film this way, you can't expect Universal to change that. Instead they give it to you with the best presentation available as of now, give it a good audio track and throw in some extra's and there it is for you to enjoy in it's full glory. Who cares if J6P see's it and wonder's why. There are movies out there for the folks that don't understand intentional grain, directors visions, etc. like King Kong, Riddick, etc. that will fully show why HD-DVD is a nice upgrade to Standard.

Wow. This is one weird thread. Are we critiquing the the disc itself or randomly dissing Mann's directorial choices? The one thing has nothing to do with the other.

Maybe you don't like his aesthetic -- that's cool. Not all movies are for everyone and you're entitled to your opinion. But if the disc is an accurate representation of the movie as it was made and screened in theaters, then it is -- by definition -- a good, well-produced HD-DVD, is it not? Your opinion of the story, characters, acting, writing, directing, music, etc, etc has exactly ZERO to do with whether the disc is technically "good."

This seems to be an ongoing problem with reviews of HD-DVD (and Blu-Ray for that matter) movies. The picture quality is so good that the reviewer is left with nothing to say other than "gee, this sure has pretty/ugly cinematography!". So we end up with reviews that have nothing useful to say about the discs themselves.

Apart from the OP, most of the posters here seem to accept that the HD DVD looks the way the film itself does, and then go on to comment on that look. Surely such comments are legitimate things to say?