csuperman

The first time I saw this film was on DVD, and the film appeared to be mixed in such a way that the ambiance overpowered the dialogue track, making it very difficult to understand. I thought this was an aesthetic choice and actually admired the film for it - it felt voyeuristic enough with the digital photography, why not obscure the dialogue as if it were not exposition but actual genuine conversation between people? Of course the downside to this was that I didn't know what was going on (a point I'll further elaborate on in a moment) and, as far as the dialogue goes, in the few instances you could actually hear anything it sounded either dreadfully cheesy or not like anything anyone would ever say, ever. It made me quite happy I wasn't hearing too much, so as not to ruin the illusion of a complex and sophisticated narrative.

But that was watching it out of context.

I've now watched it again on Blu-ray, the dialogue track is clear and precise, and I can finally follow the plot of this film. And BOY does it move!

It turns out what was obscured was a water tight, katana sharp script which tore you through its glamorous yet downright f-ed up world better than, I feel, far too many films I've seen in recent years. It's ironic that behind its rough and somewhat awkward exterior lies a smooth as polished marble interior. I don't think it's a very accessible film -i f it were pulled off in a cleaner fashion (shot on film etc.) it might've seen more praise, though, from where I'm standing, I think the two aspects compliment each other. It runs so smoothly underneath that when it gets plush and stylish, you fully believe it, as you do when things get tough and procedural.

Some of the character stuff's still flawed - I believe in the drama of Sonny and Isabella's relationship but not in the actual relationship, and did Jose just fancy her too? I mean I was struggling to see his problem with them.

I think my personal favourite thing about this film is that, tonally, I can't sense any difference between it and the series. I mean I'd describe it as 'exactly the same, just not dated'. Can't quite say why ... I can only assume Miami VICE is just as relevant today as it was back in the 80's

I was taken aback by how funny this was because it's just so achingly wholesome ... and that's all the review I think you'll need, I can only imagine you were avoiding it for that reason too. They're gay, she's an immigrant, the kids are noisy, but they all have one thing in common - their home planet, Utopia.

Now, there's a minimum of 10 lines per review; and encourage pithy critique that does not - one tries to be as forthcoming as one can, without ruining anything about the product - but if IMDb insists: each episode ends with a monologue, à la 'melted cheese down your throat', though sometimes it's funny (either way, I could still do without it). There are times when the comedy is surprisingly slow to where you've figured out the joke before it's told, only what's told actually ends up being a less punchy version of what you saw coming. And, finally, blah blah blahs too blah blah blah.

Nevertheless they did good with this, it somehow turned out better than we all thought it was going to be.

When it's not being divine inter-conceited - completely out of nowhere, into your lap bull - it makes not a single shred of sense. This is a masterclass on how NOT to write a screenplay. Monty is the only consistent thing in this film. What does a drug dealer want with his kids? How did his ex wife turn into such a monster? What exactly does someone like Julia find 'fall in love' attractive about him? ... I mean I know a relationship like there's isn't far fetched but, in this movie, it only seemed to make sense for them to find each other fun.

It's all drama for drama's sake and, in no way, illustrates the idea that when everything seems like it's about to get the better of you, don't let it because things are about to get better for you. It's a good message, just prove it properly.