The House Next Door

'Cinema of Zen Pulp' is an interesting definition for Mann's work.

Very interesting piece -- thanks for posting it.

I think there's a lot of unconscious stuff going on that is often attributed to conscious intention, and this video essay takes that route; nevertheless, it makes for rich food for thought.

I look forward to the next one.

you are saving film criticism and taking it into the future. thank you!

Phantom: "I think there's a lot of unconscious stuff going on that is often attributed to conscious intention, and this video essay takes that route."

Oh, absolutely. But that's more a convention of criticism than any sort of statement about whether the patterns, motifs and recurring obsessions in Mann's films were put there on purpose in every single case. A lot of the time artists are just going with their guts, making decisions on the fly.

But I think unconscious choices are as intentional as conscious ones; they say a lot about the artist, and while sometimes critics may draw a conclusion or make an inference that the artist never meant to provoke, that doesn't mean that part of my argument isn't valid, or that the the inference or conclusion is wrong.

I've been a critic for 18 years, a filmmaker for 8, and a film lover my entire life. I can't begin to tell you how many times I've had conversations with artists where they say, of something I've written, "I didn't mean to say that or do that, but you might be onto something."

There have also, of course, been instances where filmmakers read something I wrote about their work and say, "That's not even remotely what I intended and I can't imagine where you got that from" -- in which case I review my assertions.

Upon review, sometimes I realize that I misinterpreted something or saw a design or a pattern in what were really just a bunch of coincidences or accidents. Other times I conclude that the artist was flying by the seat of his or her pants (something many of the most interesting artists tend to do), and don't recognize certain tendencies or motifs in their work -- not because they're unobservant or dumb, but because they're not the sort of artist that takes a panoramic view of their artistic choices.

Example: Robert De Niro. He tends to give monosyllabic answers during interviews, seems deeply uncomfortable with critical analysis of any kind, and generally gives the impression that he's the sort of actor who just does the job in a particular way (his own intense twist on The Method) for reasons he's not inclined to probe too deeply. It's just how he does things. If you put a gun to his head he probably couldn't explain why he made most of the choices he's made (insert "Rocky and Bullwinkle" quip here).

But he's still built a body of work with a consistent set of preoccupations and tendencies, ones that are often plain to see and that he clearly didn't just stumble into. If De Niro's career is built on subconscious choices rather than conscious ones (which might or might not be the case; he's probably just one of those genius actors whose brains are in his body), those choices still express a certain world view as vividly as a career in which every single move was premeditated.

As far as giving the director credit for something that might have been suggested by a camera person, an editor or an actor, that's just a convention of criticism, too. Frank Lloyd Wright didn't build every piece of molding and every stick of furniture in one of the houses he designed, but he either approved everything personally or hired people who knew what he wanted so that he wouldn't have to walk around signing off on every detail. Either way it's a Frank Lloyd Wright house.

My dad, a jazz composer, once told me, in a conversation about the relative "seriousness" of jazz and classical, "Composition is improvisation slowed down, and improvisation is composition speeded up." I think about that statement every time a reader or viewer asks, "How do you know the artist meant to do that? How do you know it wasn't just the result of a happy accident, or a suggestion by the gaffer, or a mistake at the lab?" I don't, and I don't lose any sleep over the fact that I don't. Where art is concerned, I tend to consider subconscious choice vs. conscious choice vs. confluence of accidents to be in much the same wheelhouse as, improvisation vs. composition; which is to say, they're different versions of the same thing. And in any event, I'd rather talk about the music.

Matt, very much looking forward to the video essays on later Mann. I'm extremely picky with critics/reviewers, and maybe sometimes I disagree with you (not on the matters of Miami Vice and The New World, of course), but you're one of the few critics that anyone pays attention to that actually knows how to analyze a piece of work for what it is, frame for frame.

Also, I agree with your explanation above about how an artist's unconscious decisions are just as valid as the conscious ones. Often great artists cannot explain why their work is good or bad. That's a task better left to an astute outside observer.

Lastly, in response to your PE review, I've only seen it once. I'm probably one of the biggest proponents of Miami Vice there is (I believe the film is borderline top ten of this decade – still undecided on some films). Thus, I was bound to expect "Miami Vice: 1930s" here, and that's not what I got. It stuck me as having less detail and visual design, unlike the Antonioni/Melville inspirations of Vice. It's just a really compressed film. That being said, I'm looking forward to viewing it again and perhaps finding some conceptual angle to best assess this film. I don't doubt that it's at least very good. I just expect a lot from Mann these days, even if many people don't. (Like you, as of now, my main problem is not Bale, but the FBI subplot perhaps taking away from more exploration of the interesting relationship between Dillinger and Frechette.)

Very much enjoyed your video narration, and appreciate the time and thought gone into it. It highlights the nuance in Mann's work that seems to be overlooked by many film critics who just don't seem to "get" his message, rushing into a judgement after just one viewing. If you are interested, take a look at material I have pulled together over at www.michael-mann.blogspot.com

Thank you for this essay. It justifies my love of Vice all those years ago. I was only 13 and didn't really get all the elements Mann was bringing to a TV show, but I knew this was unlike anything I'd ever seen.

Now I need to throw season 1 in my queue and revisit it, because those VHS tapes I lovingly crafted of the original telecasts wore out a long time ago.

Intresting video-essay! The only thing I was missing is de palmas "sarface" as a reference point, since it's aesthetic and use of sytnhesizer music seems to have had a huge influential on MV. If Iam not mistaken, that one shoot out by the pool was even shot on a set from that film (frank lopez' house).

Iam (or was?) a huge Mann-fan, but imho he has become far too much of a show-off, lately, to be in the same league as the humble Malick (especially in MV I found many of the wannabe "poetic" shots horribly pretentious: "look!! what great nighttime images I can produce with my brandnew hi-def-camera...".

Very interesting, Matt. I was wondering if you're planning to discuss "Crime Story" at some point in this series? A show with not nearly the seismic impact as "Vice," but one that was more interesting and seemingly revealing and personal for at least its first season.

I don't think Mann was influenced by the music of Scarface. The Keep came out at the exact same time as that film and included a very synthy soundtrack from Tangerine Dream (a bad match IMO, but you knew it had to have been his choice).

Even seeing the trailers of PE, the first thing on my mind was how HD footage would fit into a period film. I believe Mann used the same camera system he's had from Collateral, but this was the first film not set in the present. There's an assumption from most people that period movies must be on film, and Mann seems to want to destroy it.

I watched Miami Vice the film again the night before I saw Public Enemies and my appreciation grew. The weakest elements seemed to be the writing in a number of areas and the delivery of those lines by the two leads.