Modern Classics: ‘Heat’, Michael Mann and the Art of the Crime Film

Modern Classics: ‘Heat’, Michael Mann and the Art of the Crime Film

A few reflections on this classic film starring Robert De Niro and Al Pacino, centered on the tense relationship between a thief and the cop on his trail.

Whenever we revisit films that have triumphantly withstood the passage of time, we tend to ask the same question: why? What accounts for their durability? That question becomes even more pointed with Heat, Michael Mann’s crime drama released 30 years ago, on December 15, 1995. After all, there are dozens of thrillers built around a near-symbiotic relationship between a cop and a thief, featuring strong action set pieces, excellent actors, and tightly constructed scripts. So what is it, exactly, that makes Heat indisputable—epic, a classic even among classics of the genre?

One could venture several answers, and many of them would sound perfectly reasonable, yet none seems entirely sufficient on its own. Consider a few. The film brings together two titans, Robert De Niro and Al Pacino, sharing scenes for the first time after working in parallel for nearly a quarter century (The Godfather Part II doesn’t count, since their characters existed on separate timelines). It boasts a remarkable script that gives life, depth, and credibility to more than a dozen characters. It features one of the most impressive action sequences ever filmed—and three or four others that come close, even if they’re less overtly spectacular. Its narrative interweaves the lives and inner worlds of its two protagonists in ways uncommon for this kind of movie, discarding neat categories like “hero” and “villain.” Visually, it’s forceful and often striking, capturing Los Angeles in a way cinema rarely had before.

All of that, taken together, could certainly define a classic. And yet, revisiting the film, there’s a sense that what truly endures is something harder to pin down. It’s the staging, the way the film is shot, Mann’s visual conception of these themes—an approach that could best be described as poetic. The viewer may not consciously register it at first—strong visual compositions often work on a subconscious level—but Heat, like all of Mann’s cinema, is intensely stylized, elegant, and slightly abstract. Its color palette, camera angles, and framing don’t always conform to classical norms, yet they never cross into outright experimentation. They are simply evocative, revelatory, and unmistakably personal.

In Heat, Mann frames Neil McCauley (De Niro) and Vincent Hanna (Pacino) as solitary figures set against vast, visually overwhelming spaces—rooms, houses, the city itself. This contrasts the increasingly complex relationship between a cool, hyper-professional thief who refuses personal attachments that might limit his freedom, and an intense, volatile, yet equally obsessive cop, with the emptiness surrounding them. That emptiness is both physical and emotional: a negative space that generates meaning through absence. The cold color scheme (the film is a catalogue of blues and grays), the austere costuming of both men (perhaps the film’s most unmistakably ’90s element), and the frequent choice of liminal locations on the city’s edges—empty warehouses, nighttime airports, highways, hotels, stations, abandoned drive-ins—heighten the sense that the story unfolds in a kind of non-place, at once realistic and deeply psychological: a landscape of the mind.

In interviews, Mann—who would push these visual obsessions even further in Collateral, to the brink of abstraction—has spoken about his desire to create a subjective experience for the viewer, one that aligns more closely with how situations are felt rather than how they might be presented from a supposedly “objective” perspective. In Heat, he wagers that the film itself can become a sensation, a journey that rarely strays from realism (the plot is concrete and precise), yet searches for poetry in the characters’ movements and actions. What could have been a fairly conventional crime story becomes something closer to a melancholic Edward Hopper painting—with carefully placed firearms resting on tabletops.

Of course, none of this visual architecture would matter without a strong dramatic foundation. And here, one of the film’s most admirable qualities is Mann’s “horizontal” impulse: his commitment to giving substantial dramatic weight to the supporting characters. This is the story of Neil and Vincent, but also of Chris (Val Kilmer), Eady (Amy Brenneman), Justine (Diane Venora), Charlene (Ashley Judd), Nate (Jon Voight), Michael (Tom Sizemore), Trejo (Danny Trejo), Drucker (Mykelti Williamson), Donald (Dennis Haysbert), Waingro (Kevin Gage), Alan (Hank Azaria), Van Zant (William Fichtner), and even a then-adolescent Natalie Portman as Lauren, the troubled daughter of Vincent’s partner. It’s not merely a matter of an impressive cast list; each of these characters feels like a real person with a past the film seamlessly weaves into its narrative universe, grounding the violence and apparent emotional coldness in the dimensions of human tragedy and consequence.

And then there’s the De Niro–Pacino duel, which in 1995 paired the two most famous and influential actors in Hollywood—an argument can be made that they still are—and helped sell the film as a singular event. Their contrasting acting styles are inseparable from the characters they play. As in a different register in The Irishman, the collision between De Niro’s typically restrained, methodical approach and Pacino’s more expansive, sometimes grandiose energy (here punctuated by a couple of unforgettable outbursts) creates a web of associations that adds weight and intensity to every scene they share.

In their civilized game between two men who respect each other as adversaries, there’s a kind of psychological chess match, one that will inevitably lead one of them to make an unforgivable mistake in the endgame. But there’s also the palpable presence of what was already, at the time, a quarter century of film history—today, astonishingly, half a century—embodied in flesh and blood. However insistently Mann’s camera keeps them physically apart, the tension is constant. And it’s there that Heat ultimately becomes a subjective experience, one the viewer completes with years of familiarity with these faces and bodies on screen. Whether across a diner table, talking about their daily lives, or in the image of two hands clasped on a dark, desolate airport runway, Heat finally unites its characters—and, through them, two actors who are inseparable from the great history of cinema itself.