Critic Review - New York Times

As Heat progresses, its sensational looks pale beside storytelling weaknesses that expose the more soulless aspects of this cat-and-mouse crime tale.

May 20, 2003 Full Review Source: New York Times | Comments (22)
New York Times
Top Critic IconTop Critic


Jack P.

Jack Pollins

i usually entitle people to their own opinion, but no one with a soul could possibly hate this masterpiece, so in summary, you my friend are an idiot

May 17 - 04:17 PM

Hans S.

Georg Pauwen

Nothing is more fun than discussing...art. Movies are art, after all. To you, this film is a masterpiece. I really hated it. I think it is the victim of a curious paradox: when you try to be meaningful, you create just the opposite effect.

Sep 6 - 03:12 AM


M. S.

I assume that's why you gave Under Siege a perfect score.

Apr 13 - 03:39 PM

Anita blowjaab

Anita Hanjaab

shut up fag

Aug 14 - 01:00 AM

Hans S.

Georg Pauwen

I fully agree. This movie is just awful. Bad acting, a horrible script, characters that are never credible, and many scenes that belong to a B-movie. And it lasts forever, almost three hours, with an ending that ranks among the worst of all times. The futile attempt to create meaningfulness and depth, ends up creating just the opposite. This flick sucks the energy right out of you, and it takes at least the same amount of time, almost three hours, to recover from this terrible viewing experience. And three beers, at a minimum.

Aug 26 - 12:49 AM

sam m.

sam macartney

Bad acting, horrible script, characters that aren't credible?

Oh come on. You've got to be trolling.

Oct 4 - 11:40 PM

Jeannie Santabene

Jeannie Santabene

Oh My!! your statements could not be farther from the truth!
That probably explains why you are the outcast here, and so out numbered! Do your research kiddo.
Bad acting?? Do not believe I have ever read a more ridiculous statement in the history of cinema.

Mar 3 - 03:20 PM

Slavic Dragov?ev

Slavic Dragov?ev

Fully Agree

Mar 26 - 09:27 AM

Zachary Donaldson

Zachary Donaldson

I'm afraid I must agree. I watched Heat right after watching Reservoir Dogs, which has become one of my favorite movies, and was expecting it to be an even better movie since it's on the top of many "Top Ten Heist Movie" lists. Yet I was bored the entire time I was watching it. The only good scene in the movie is the heist scene itself, which lasts about ten minutes.The rest is a compilation of awkward writing and awkward acting backed by a stale plot. I find it amazing that Reservoir Dogs manages to be a million times more interesting and exciting than Heat, and you don't even see the heist itself at all!

Jul 15 - 12:51 PM

Harry May

Harry May

A bad ending? The ending is amazing, that final showdown between De Niro and Pacino is cinematic gold. This in an intelligent action film, which we don't get often. For me this is Michael Mann's best film.

Jan 15 - 10:11 AM

Harry May

Harry May

Right, I can't take Hans S. seriously at all. I just looked through his ratings and he's given Under Siege 100%, Under Siege for Christ's sake!

Jan 15 - 10:15 AM


jj l

Well, in his defense, if he though Under Siege was worthy of 100%, I can see how he might not like something like heat. It certainly doesn't have the same artistic merit as Under Siege, after all. ;-)

Mar 17 - 03:24 PM

john o.

john oneill

i haven't seen it, i'm gonna watch it tongight, it looks good man

Apr 7 - 08:39 AM

Allen Y.

Allen Yang

For those who haven't watched this yet, please don't spare this movie. This "Los Angeles Crime Saga" is simply brilliant. So set the comment by Han S. as crap. It's not even believable to say that comment is even valid. One of the biggest trolls on RT, possibly this guy. How could you even say that the acting is terrible, when Al Pacino meets Robert De Niro in an amazing cops and robbers flick. There's a shootout half way through the movie, and it's truly one of the best in the history of cinema. So blast the volume if you want to experience the realism of the gun fires. I highly recommend this movie, despite of that it's a mere 3 hours long.

Apr 29 - 10:38 AM

Hans S.

Georg Pauwen

Guys, please grow up. You liked the movie, I didn't. That's it. It sounds really stupid and immature to blast somebody else's opinion. How would you like someone to react to something YOU don't like ? Would you appreciate it if that someone would call you an idiot ? In addition, none of you had any part in the production of this flick, we are all just consumers.

Jun 23 - 10:44 AM


M. S.

You're an idiot because you bash this film for being predictible and cliche, when you admitted to enjoying Avatar.

Jul 18 - 11:59 AM

Anita blowjaab

Anita Hanjaab

Again shut your motherfucking whore mouth up....fag.

Aug 14 - 01:01 AM


Chris Hall

You gotta be kidding me! What movie DO you like?

Aug 4 - 03:52 PM

eric s.

eric siluk

I have to say that I am shocked by a score as low as 86% for what is one of the rare...no, almost non existent perfect movies. Let me clarify what I mean by perfect; "Heat" does everything it needs to do when it needs to do it, and absolutely nothing that it doesn't need to do in order to portray the characters and move through the plot. And the astonishing thing is all of this brilliant efficiency is shown with an artful, cold detachment that sets the almost queasy mood and brings you into the "feeling" of these characters tragic lives. So to give a rotten score to such a movie when there is so much garbage out here in movieland is absolutely ridiculous. I will refrain from calling you names for writing the worst review I have ever read but your inability to have bonded with this movie strongly makes me question both your life experiences(lack of)and your intelligence.

Nov 10 - 08:34 PM

Slavic Dragov?ev

Slavic Dragov?ev

Who appointed you a top critic, again?

Mar 26 - 09:28 AM


Saetre Saetre

"But three hours is a long time." 3 hours of magic if you ask me, reviewer.

Jun 2 - 01:54 PM

Tommy H.

Tommy Edward

This is why I wish women didn't review movies. Male critics can look at chick flicks objectively, but women rarely ever do that for movies you'd consider a guy flick. Seriously, just check out the most popular of the genre and you'll see women giving a low score because the strengths of these movies have no effect on them, like a psychopath watching a horror movie, but then if you check out truly stupid and predictable romantic comedies you'll see only women giving it rediculous compliments and a high score. They also rate up any movie with a female lead who plays a character typically played by men. They seem to review movies based more on what it says about women. They only review the female characters, the emotion, poltical correctness and if it's suitable for children, and not so much if the movie is actually good or not.

Jun 7 - 01:43 PM

Tony Roxstrom

Tony Roxstrom

Too bad your listing of viewed movies is total dildos. Go and make me a sammich.

Sep 6 - 04:09 PM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile