L.A. Takedown (1989)

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Since I'm a fan of "Heat" I took the time to watch the preliminary material which Michael Mann created after long-lasting struggle to make his dream movie come true. Mann decided that he waited enough for a big-time production and to use this great script for TV release with the intention to continue it to a TV series.But, let's get to the point...1. Pros:1.1 I've read the 1994 revision of the script, which included unrealized shots and dialogue in the 1995's "Heat". The good thing about "L.A. Takedown" is that you have the chance to see some of those good lines and additional storyline, which serves as a bonus to what you already saw in "Heat". 1.2. Directing was very decent, but anyway I wouldn't recognize it that Mann stays behind it if I didn't knew already.1.3 You can see the growth from the original version to the remake as Heat. Comparing LA Takedown to Heat you can recognize the development and decisions which Mann took in order to make "Heat" such a classic that it is.2. Cons: 2.1 Poor Cast & Acting. Since it is TV low budget movie I guess we couldn't expect more but this was some "piece of work". Hanna's character was developed Okay, but that's all. Patrick McLaren (a.k.a. Neil in Heat) was a complete nightmare, it doesn't correspond to the image you can visualize in the script. I know that the benchmark is too high having such a great cast for Heat - comparison is out of the question.. Nevertheless those wanna-be actors on LA Takedown doesn't even deserve to be chosen for a porn movie with a storyline...3. Bottom line: if you are a fan of "Heat" and Michael Mann - see it for the above mentioned pros.. It's like looking at the draft of Mona Lisa or some other masterpiece - so it is kinda of interesting... If you are not a fan - then it is a waste of time.

Recap: A professional gang of robbers take down an armored car, killing the three guards in the process, in a spectacular way. This gets the attention of Vincent Hanna and his team on Robbery and Homicide. With some luck they get a lead on one of the robbers and soon they have the gang staked out. But they have no evidence and must catch them in the act. The robbers themselves starts to feel the heat, but still decide to do one last bank job, one that would get them enough money to vanish and retire. But Hanna is one their heels and a lethal showdown is held on the streets of LA.Comments: I know, it's not fair to compare movies. Movies should be measured and judged based on themselves. And especially it's not fair to compare a movie with classic and personal favorite Heat (1995). But in this case, it is inevitable. And actually a little interesting to see how the story has evolved since Michael Mann is responsible for both direction and script on both movies. The stories are very similar, not very surprising as Heat is a remake of LA Takedown (LA T).But there are a few key elements that makes Heat into a classic and LA T into "just" a good movie. First off, the actors in LA T are good, but they are not Pacino, De Niro, Kilmer or any of the other stars. As the dialog in many cases is identical it is easy to see that LA T cast can't deliver the same lines with quite the same intensity, suspense and emotion. Still, I want to emphasize that the LA T cast is good, especially the meeting between Hanna and McLaren is good. Another key difference is that the characters are much younger in LA T and hence not having acquired the experience and history and family that enriches Heat. And this is maybe the biggest difference of all. Heat is clearly much more thought through and analyzed, which is natural since it is the second try. Subplots are few in LA T, characters abruptly introduced and forgotten with no or few clues to their connection to the story. Those subplots are much more explored in Heat, and we get a broad complex view. In LA T the scene is simple and sometimes confusing from lack of explanation.Still some scenes are worth a good look. The mentioned meeting above is one. The (in Heat classical) shootout is very good also. But one does miss the depth of the characters, their personal history. Still, in itself a good movie, and very interesting to watch as comparison to Heat.6/10

This is simply an awesome movie and I saw no reason to make a "remake" of this movie (HEAT). The original is great even though the remake is great to. This has been one of my favorites since it was released in 1989. The Coffey shop seen is just incredible. This is much better than HEAT, even though HEAT by itself is a great movie and has a very impressive shoot out seen. I do not understand why this movie didn't become a huge success and why lead actor Scott Plank didn't end up a star.BTW The Swedish title for this movie was "Made in LA"

This is the exact same story as the movie HEAT staring Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, and Val Kilmer. The primary difference between LA Takedown and HEAT is the fact that LA Takedown doesn't drag on for 172 minutes. Even though it was a made for TV movie, it had a great plot, the actors did a great job, and it was much more fast paced when compared to HEAT. I still have it on video from when I videotaped it the first time it was on TV. I own HEAT on DVD, but if given the choice I would rather watch LA Takedown. I highly recommend it if you have an opportunity to watch it.