Keith Uhlich's review of Miami Vice at the House Next Door just about had me convinced I wanted to see the movie, and then I read this dueling review of Vice by Uhlich's blogging colleague, Odienator, a few posts down the page:
Barry Shabaka Henley had the finest moment in Collateral, so it is dismaying that his Lt. Castillo (so grandly brought to life on TV by Edward James Olmos) is given little to do but threaten to take away Crockett and Tubbs' badges. Where Olmos' sour magnetism intimidated both his underlings and the viewer, Henley isn't given the opportunity to feel superior to the two detectives.
Miami Vice, the TV show, may have been unique in the history of television in having at its center two main characters who were almost completely irrelevent to the show's success.
It wasn't simply the case that Crockett and Tubbs weren't that interesting, together or separately, or that the actors who played them, Don Johnson and Philip Michael Thomas, were bad---Johnson was passable. Who knows about Thomas since he was given less to do than his closest television forebear, Tonto---it was the case that Vice's writers and producers had about zero commitment to developing them as characters.
Crockett and Tubbs were attitudes. Beyond that they were models on which to hang the Versace sports jackets and t-shirts. They existed mostly as targets for the cameras to focus on as the plots carried us through the Miami and Caribbean underworlds.
Miami Vice was about creating a style. The clothes, the shades, the unshaven chins, the music, and the breathtaking visuals of Miami Beach---the girls in bikinis and the flamingos were presented as decorative flourishes to the pastel architecture---were part of its look, but I mean the show’s cinematic style, the art of its visual storytelling.
It's this aspect of Miami Vice that Matt Zoller Seitz celebrates in his appreciation of the show, which is also up at The House Next Door---what a great blog!
Miami Vice was the first successful attempt to do movies on television, to tell stories with pictures rather than dialogue. That’s partly why Crockett and Tubbs seem neglected. They weren’t really designed to talk.
But to the extent that the show was about something other than its own artistry for artistry’s sake, it was about the attractiveness of corruption. The world Crockett pretended to be a part of and the world he and Tubbs were supposedly engaged in unmaking was beautiful and fun...to a point.
The other side of the law was where the good times were to found. This side of the law, life was gritty, humorless, and necessarily dull. The gray interior of the station, the ordinary prettiness of the female detectives, Gina and Trudi, the schlubby second bananas, Zito and Switek, and Castillo’s homely, scarred, frowning face---all of that was part of an essentially Puritan background scolding. Sensual delights were part of the devil's bait and switch. Goodness, decency, a moral life and the resulting civilized society Crockett and Tubbs were out protecting required sacrifices, including the sacrifice of easy pleasures.
Which, of course, was totally unpersuasive next to the blue and green water, the bouncing cigarette boats, the bouncing tanned bottoms of the girls in their thong bikinis. How could we resist?
Crockett was always drawn to the life. But he was just a stand-in for us. The show was a seduction. Like pornography with a social conscience, Look at all this, kids! Turns you on, doesn’t it? But remember it’s bad for you.
Crockett and Tubbs were bottles into which we poured ourselves. Then the cameras carried them into an erotically supercharged dream on our behalf. Beautiful, sunlit or starlit, easy, guiltless, unearned, unbilled pleasure.
And the only real argument against it, the only angel counselling resistance to the devil on our shoulder, was Castillo.
Castillo had been over to the other side and lost his soul there. Somehow he’d managed to come back and bring most of what was good in himself back with him. Most of it, not all of it.
None of this was in the writing. It was all in Edward James Olmos’ face.
He didn’t like Crockett. He saw too much of his young self in him, the kid Castillo who thought it was all a lark, who trusted too much in his own decency and integrity. He understood Crockett’s attraction to the rewards of corruption. He even saw a use for it. Crockett was a more persuasive narc because he wanted what the bad guys wanted. He could enjoy their company, up until the point where it was time to make the money that paid for the fun.
What Castillo disliked and distrusted in Crockett was his frivolousness about temptation. The sense of superiority Odienator describes Castillo as exhibiting towards his detectives came from self-knowledge. Castillo knew that young and foolish as he'd been when whatever had happened to him to steal his soul happened, he'd been a stronger, wiser, better man then than Crockett was now.
Castillo thought Crockett should have understood the difference and have been more careful. But Crockett didn't and he wasn't.
Crockett didn’t see how easy it would be for even a man stronger than himself—a Castillo, say—to give in and let himself go. And he didn’t see how that giving in and loss of self-control could take place while he was still on the right side of the law.
This is why the lightweight Johnson was actually perfect for the part. He had a bad boy rep that was really a naughty boy’s rep. Johnson looked like what he was, someone who could fool himself into thinking he was a meaner, badder dude than he actually was. This is why Colin Farrell, even though a much better actor---see Shakespeare's Sister's post on Farrell, a lament for a glory and a promise that's possibly been lost, Averting the End of the Affair---and talented enough to play the dangerous man Johnson’s Crockett thought he was, is also right for the part. His own reputation is a naughty boy’s rep. Swaggering, scowling, playacting the part of a hardcase, Farrell reveals his essential softness.
Without a strongly defined Castillo there to play it off of though, I don’t see how that side of Crockett—his weakness—can be made dynamic. It seems to me that it can only become a subject of interior monologue, which movies don’t do well. What we usually get instead are lots of shots of the hero brooding until the girl or the sidekick comes along to snap it him out of it.
Girl: Tell me what’s bothering you. Don’t shut me out, please.
Sidekick: What’s eating you, man?
Hero to either one: Nothing’s wrong, I’m fine. Let’s go.
But a Castillo could look right into Crockett’s soul.
Castillo, in so many words: Show me you’re not what I know you are. Prove to me you can keep from doing what I know you can’t help doing. Succeed where you are doomed to fail.
____________________________
Castillo, especially as embodied in Edward James Olmos, was the kind of writers’ temptation it would have been easy to overuse. But it seemed to me Miami Vice failed the other way and underused him. When I heard that Michael Mann was going to make the movie, I hoped that he would use the opportunity to rectify the show’s mistake. And, although I understand why Mann might have been reluctant to do it, I thought he could have cast Olmos as the movie’s Castillo, Olmos having enough weight and talent to overcome the gimickyness of it.
Barry Shabaka Henley might have been a good second choice but it sounds like we’ll never know because Mann pretty much threw away the character.
But the actor I think would have been best after Olmos is Benicio Del Toro. Del Toro has just the right mixture of sorrow and hauntedness in his eyes and the same harrowed face. In fact, if someone in Hollywood is ever crazy enough to remake Casablanca, Del Toro is my choice to play Rick.
If the movie had a good Castillo, though, I would have liked to see someone else as Crockett, someone who could have reacted to Castillo’s contempt with something like Don Johnson’s moral cluelessness. I have an actor in mind, but you’re going to think I’m kidding---someone who needs to do something radical to save himself from a different kind of corruption, artistic corruption, someone with his own naughty boy reputation who through laziness is in danger of becoming a self-parody before his time.
Owen Wilson.
(Cross-posted at the Anecdotal Antidote.)
________________________________________________________________________
Thanks for reading. Please help keep this blog up and running by donating to the Tip Jar in the upper right hand corner, using either PayPal or Amazon or you can just click here to go straight to Amazon. If you'd prefer to donate by snail mail the address is Lance Mannion, PO Box 263, New Paltz, NY 12561. Make checks payable to E. Reilly. Also be sure to visit our advertisers and consider buying an ad yourself through The Liberal Prose at BlogAds.
Hey Lance... how did Richard Roeper get your job??
Posted by: Jennifer | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 10:53 AM
I am too young to have watched Miami Vice and probably won't see this movie, but I just have to say how *much* I love Edward James Olmos. He brings such a wonderful gravity and nuance to his roles.
Posted by: Claire | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 11:05 AM
Edward James Olmos as Castillo.
Exactly. There's an actor who can give you a whole volume of exposition in a single look. His abilities sell Battlestar Galactica every week.
Owen Wilson as Crockett. Err ...
I guess I could see that.
Posted by: SAP | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 11:23 AM
I, like Claire, am much too young to have watched Miami Vice and probably won't see the movie...
But my question, Mr. Mannion, is...why must you have used the phrase "self-parody" when describing my boyfriend, Owen Wilson?
Although I agree the danger does lurk, I still don't like the thought.
Just sayin'.
Posted by: blue girl | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 11:44 AM
Owen Wilson? The Butterscotch Stallion? I dunno about that!
Posted by: velvet goldmine | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 01:27 PM
The Butterscotch Stallion?
Ooooh. Interesting phrase...
:)
Posted by: blue girl | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 01:28 PM
I've been telling people for some time now that Miami Vice is the best and most devastating movie that I have seen since The New World at Christmastime, and I've seen it a few times now, but I'm beginning to wonder whether my reaction has passed beyond idiosyncrasy into the realm of solipsism. Other people's criticisms -- Gong Li's accent, the stylized, murmured dialogue, the shocking violence, the obsessive romanticism, the grimy textured night -- are all virtues to me.
Posted by: Rasselas | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 01:33 PM
Hey, if Rasselas says it's the best movie since "The New World," then I'm definitely going to the thing. My two favorite movies of 2005 (which I caught on DVD THIS year) are Carroll Ballard's "Duma" about a boy and his cheetah in South Africa, and Terrance Malick's "The New World," which was unexpectedly great (he even used Colin Farrell correctly, almost erasing the horror that was "Alexander.")
And Lance, though it's a fine essay, please do go back and change "Versaci" to "Versace." The boo-boo reminded me of Nomi Malone in "Showgirls" mispronouncing the name after she had bought a fabulous Ver-Sayce ensemble at Caesars Palace.
Posted by: sfmike | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 01:54 PM
SF Mike,
Thanks for the catch. I think I just proved that I've never owned anything with his label on it.
I aslo think I have to see The New World.
Posted by: Lance | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 02:17 PM
"I, like Claire, am much too young to have watched Miami Vice and probably won't see the movie..."
Geez, Lance Mannion's blog gets all the young hot chicks......blue girl, how are you in advertising for 10 years (I assume that means you're at least 32) and you're still too young to see Miami Vice? I'm 33 and I loved the original series to death. Mom wouldn't let me watch it.
Posted by: burritoboy | Tuesday, August 08, 2006 at 09:54 PM
I assume that means you're at least 32
You're correct, burritoboy!
I was just kidding. You know. Joking around. Being sarcastic.
In other words, not acting my age.
:)
Posted by: blue girl | Wednesday, August 09, 2006 at 07:12 AM
Typically fine Lance Mannion analysis.
I'm in no hurry to see the movie, though.
Posted by: Kevin Wolf | Wednesday, August 09, 2006 at 10:55 AM
Acting your age is over rated. If you want a Michael Mann remake worth doing, consider Thief and then come back and tell me who should play Okla. Okay. By.
Posted by: The Heretik | Thursday, August 10, 2006 at 12:04 AM
lance, you forgot to mention jan hammer's music, which added a lot to the mood. pretty pictures and moody music can act strongly upon a person's soul, especially if that person lives too much in her of his ectual and ignores or suppresses her or his senses.
i'm in my early 50s, so i remember miami vice in its prime. i wasn't a regular viewer, but when i sat down to watch it, i looked forward to see what would happen next. i haven't felt that sense of anticipation for a tv series since seinfeld went off the air.
Posted by: harry near indy | Friday, August 11, 2006 at 06:07 PM
My theory of movies and movie reviews is, if you think you really want to see an upcoming movie, don't read the reviews. Even if the movie turns out bad, you'll know you had to try it anyway.
But I agree that the absence of Edward James Olmos was probably the movie's most serious deficiency (although I liked it overall). Benicio Del Torro would have been good for the role as would Esai Morales.
Finally, a Zooey Deschanel report. I noticed Zooey was in this Winter Passing, which also included Will Ferrel, so I rented. Mostly a very good movie, although there's a tragic cat scene in it. In addition, while Zooey was captivating and intriguing as always, Amelia Warner just really stole the show.
Posted by: Bulworth | Monday, August 14, 2006 at 11:02 AM
what was the name of Mann's next TV series.....set at first in Chicago in the 50s...then moved to Vegas? A hugely neglected series.... that launched the career (if thats the word) of ex chicago cop Dennis Farina. Im told it isnt syndicated in any way because of legal hang ups with the music (had great music)....
Anyway, its an interesting show to compare to Miami Vice. And for the record, yes, Olmos was terrific. Perhaps the only series character I can think of who was genuinely tragic.
Posted by: john steppling | Monday, August 14, 2006 at 01:26 PM
Crime Story.
Posted by: DJ | Monday, August 14, 2006 at 02:20 PM
Miami Vice not only had the great Jan Hammer score throughout, the "guest music" was also wonderful. Phil Collins' "In the Air Tonight," which inspired the title Lance used in this post. Glenn Frey's "Smuggler's Blues," which was featured in the episode Frey himself appeared in. Peter Gabriel's "Biko," which was the song used in the climax/ending of the episode "Evan." On and on. The TV episodes were used very much as music videos. And with MTV becoming popular at around the same time, I bet it was no accident.
Posted by: liberalrob | Monday, August 14, 2006 at 04:05 PM
Dire Straits "Brothers in Arms" was very well used in a great episode as well.
Probably my biggest complaint with the movie besides yours and the wasting of Jamie Foxx was the lack of decent music, can you remember a single song used during the film?
Me either.
Posted by: Eric | Monday, August 14, 2006 at 04:28 PM
Parallels between Miami Vice and music television are no accident. The story is that NBC chief Brandon Tartikoff handed Mann a note that said "MTV cops" and asked him what he could do with it.
And Crime Story was indeed a wonderful companion to Miami Vice, far more serialized and more stylized in its own way. Mann essentially revisted the idea of Crime Story for the movie Heat, from the relationship between the protagonist and antagonist to scenes and dialogue straight from the series. Anchor Bay's recent Crime Story DVD season sets do suffer from a handful of awkward music replacements, but most of the original soundtrack is still in place, including tunes by the Rolling Stones, Johnny Preston and many Motown greats, among others.
Posted by: Cole Moore Odell | Monday, August 14, 2006 at 04:40 PM
>Miami Vice was the first successful attempt to do movies on television, to tell stories with pictures rather than dialogue.
Naah...the original Mission:Impossible was the first TV show you could not follow by the soundtrack alone. Very cinematic, even if it was essentially the same movie over and over.
Posted by: Paul D. | Monday, August 14, 2006 at 06:01 PM
In fact, if someone in Hollywood is ever crazy enough to remake Casablanca, Del Toro is my choice to play Rick.
There are a number of films that would work well as a remake--"Casablanca" is most definitely NOT one of them. As good as Del Toro can be, his Rick would pale in comparison to Bogart and I can't think of any current actress who could hold a candle to Ingrid Bergman.
Sadly, since Hollywood was crazy enough to greenlight remakes of "King Kong" (twice) and "Psycho", I don't put it past them to try and remake "Casablanca".
Posted by: "Fair and Balanced" Dave | Tuesday, August 15, 2006 at 10:31 AM
Owen Wilson... YES!
Amazing, I thought exactly the same thing, before I even read your column. It seems counter-intuitive, I know, but Wilson can play what you call the "cluelessness" that a Sonny Crockett character needs. Sonny was NOT a hard-ass cop, he was a fun-boy. (I always thought if Castillo ever took away his car, he'd have quit the force and joined the Cali cartel.)
It would have been an inspired bit of casting, like the casting of Michael Keaton as Batman or Tom Cruise as Lestat -- it made you say "what? you're kidding!" but they stepped up to the plate and hit it out of the park.
Posted by: Joe Max | Tuesday, August 15, 2006 at 03:36 PM
By reading these retropsective comments on the original series, I wish I were old enough to have watched the show when it premiered. It sounds revolutionary in a way I would appreciate.
Posted by: GW | Tuesday, August 15, 2006 at 04:32 PM
Hollywood did remake Casablanca. They flipped the genders, set it in the future, added a gratuitous Pamela Anderson striptease, and called it Barb Wire. I actually saw it before I saw the original Casablanca and when I finally got around to seeing the original, I had a nagging feeling of deja vu before, to my horror, I realized, Oh my God. This is Barb-friggin'-Wire!
Posted by: Peter Lynn | Tuesday, August 15, 2006 at 10:48 PM
I need to emphasize what silas said early in the comments. If you want to see Olmos in his full glory, you MUST watch Battlestar Galactica. The man is awesome. You can just watch the unstated emotions - the commander standing alone, the father struggling to reach his son, the friend/mentor to his XO, the military guy not trusting the politicians. His acting and the writers make the BG a top-rated show.
Posted by: J. | Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 11:58 AM
By the way, Mann did ask Olmos to reprise Castillo in the movie, but he declined. I think I read that on ign.com. Or maybe miami-vice.org.
Olmos is the best thing about Miami Vice, and IMHO his Castillo is one of the very best TV portrayals ever.
I absolutely loved the movie, and unlike most folks I think it is very true to the TV show.
Posted by: Huge Seagull | Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 01:00 PM
Oh yeah and how could folks forget the Casablanca "remake" Havana, starring Robert Redford??
Posted by: Huge Seagull | Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 01:02 PM
Edward James Olmos wasn't given a lot to work with in Miami Vice, but he took out to the max what he was given - his Castillo was a driven man, a warrior underneath, majestic in his pain. He's probably the only reason for watching the train wreck entitled Battlestar Galactica
Posted by: Susan | Wednesday, August 16, 2006 at 01:02 PM
Wasn't there ONE episode where they let Castillo/Olmos have significant airtime? The episode was really unusual (he normally had like about three minutes top). From what I vaguely recall the episode was fine (I think he went special forces commando on some bad guys) - the heavens didn't come crashing down because he was in most of the scenes...
Posted by: BramP | Thursday, August 17, 2006 at 08:01 PM