MovieChat Forums > Heat (1995) Discussion > Characters and their Tragic Flaws

Characters and their Tragic Flaws


Often times a protagonist's tragic flaw is directly related to the theme. Near the beginning of the Godfather, Michael Corelone tells his girlfriend Kay that he's not like his family. Of course, he ends up becoming the head of the family.

I take the central theme in Heat to be isolation/loneliness. It's set in a 100-mile wide city. In Mann's LA-follow-up, Collateral, Vincent opines about the disconnectedness of LA. So... cool setting. Pacino and De Niro's characters are workaholics, which isolates them. So... well done with their jobs. These elements are excellent vehicles to help to realize the theme, however...

McCauley repeatedly emphasizes walking away if the heat is around the corner, yet violates his own motto when he pursues revenge, which ends up getting him killed. He's not normally a vengeful guy. Van Zant tried to kill him, but he was able to put it aside for more important business. Is McCauley incapable of shedding criminal life?

Kilmer keeps his skin, but he's separated from his wife. He drives away. He doesn't really have a choice though. In a way, he's saved because she still loves him, but her minor character has more agency/arc than his more prominent character.

Pacino never gives up. McCauley's crew killed his brother-in-blue (Buffalo Bill), yet he pursues not because it's personal, but because it's his job. True to his word, he takes no satisfaction in gunning down McCauley, and holds his hand. Even though I've loved the movie for 25 years, this kind of false romanticism has bothered me in recent viewings.

It's tempting to call the whole thing homo-erotic. Typically in love stories, a couple must overcome near-impossible obstacles in order to authenicate and legitimize their love. In the case of Heat, the protagonists manage to bridge the cop-robber divide, so it's dramatically compelling.

Fans of the movie (like myself) are probably quick to call bullshit on most romantic comedies, but then here's a film that takes itself very seriously, and we're like, "Yeah, they hold hands at the end." Your fuckin' partner died earlier today. A bunch of other cops got shot.

Also, what does Pacino overcome? How does he grow from the experience? He found his soul-mate?

reply

I think you're mostly on the right track.

I would say that the theme is "connection", though.

McCauley and Hannah connect with each other, recognizing kindred spirits. They could be brothers in arms if they weren't mortal enemies. They respect each other. I don't think it's homoerotic, though.

McCauley and Hannah both struggle to connect to people. When McCauley reaches out, he finds Eady, and realises that his philosophy of "no attachments" isn't fulfilling. Hannah, meanwhile, struggles to connect with his romantic partner, pushing her away and making his life hellish. Tellingly, however, the most rewarding and valuable things Hannah does is in regards to Lauren, his step-daughter, who he always does the right thing for.

Chris and Charlene are having a hard time connecting with each other. They get a bittersweet ending, but that's not about them becoming more separated, but closer together. Distance? Sure, they're apart (for now), but Charlene's hand gesture indicates that she has gone from being willing to turn him in to being willing to give it another try.

Isolation is an important part of the film, but it's more about reaching out.

As for tragic flaws, well, those are applicable in tragedies, especially tragedies in the Greek tradition, but Heat isn't really a tragedy. It's a drama. So it's not about "Oedipus was brought down by his hubris!" but about people living their lives and trying to find each other amidst L.A. sprawl...

reply

Great reply.

Although I agree with the OP that the holding hands is silly, I also think it's understandable that Hanna is not happy that he had to kill him like that.
He's not one of those asshole hunters that pose smiling with their "trophy" after killing. Neither he's a cold hitman. Neither he's in love or friends with Neil.
He stated it clearly before: he never said "I'm gonna find you and I'm gonna kill you, motherfucker!". He said "if it's between you and some poor bastard whose wife you're gonna turn into a widow, brother, you are going down". He's a guy doing his job. He did it. But he can still feel some simpathy for the guy he had to end.

reply

Yup. He'd rather just arrest Neil. He'd rather rehabilitate him. He'd rather just grab a cuppa Joe and not worry about getting shot or killing somebody. But he's got a job and he's got that job because he wants to be responsible and make a difference for Good.

reply

Tempted to call it homo-erotic? Are you for real? The movie definitely has isolation at its core for sure. But I wouldn't call any off it homo erotic. It's about family. And yeah, the pitfalls of crime and crime fighting. I love this movie, but every character deserves everything bad that happens to them in this movie. Thems the breaks.

reply

Yeah I wouldn't call what Pacino and DeNiro shared as Homo Eroticism but more of a mutual respect that they initially discovered about each other having a cup of coffee to the bloody end of the road.

reply

Yeah they didn't hate each other, or gay love each other. They were just the two dudes at the top of there game. They needed each other really. Any challenge needs a worthy opponent. Boring otherwise. Like playing chess against someone who only knows how to play draughts.

reply

Bingo

reply

To me that's the problem with film. The cop isn't going to have respect for the leader of the bad guys that shot and killed the armored car guys in cold blood. The cop might have had respect if the bad guy had somehow managed to rob the armored car without anyone getting hurt and leaving no clues, but not just some thugs that killed people like they did.

reply

The one that killed those guys was Waingro and he's not part of their usual crew

reply

The cop chasing after the group wouldn't know that. All he would know is that they killed 3 guards.

reply

Then why not arrest him when be had a cup of coffee with him?

reply

He didn't have enough evidence for an arrest warrant. Many times cops know who did something but they also know that until they have enough evidence to get an arrest they really can't do anything.

reply

I still disagree. I think the two of them found a grudging respect for each other

Watch the scene again

https://youtu.be/mZjraQagtTo

Now watch the ending where even when Pacing shoots De Niro he still takes his hand and sits with him til he dies

https://youtu.be/9gOXNCd6L6c

reply

I'm won't argue that the director shot the movie to create that connection between the two. I never said that. My problem is that in real life a cop isn't going to be like that. This cops having some respect for a murder that's killed 3 innocent people just to steal money isn't realistic. This is just Hollywood fantasy.

reply

And again he didn't kill three innocent people Waingro did

reply

again, the cop didnt know that, and it wouldnt matter if he did.
also deNiro ok'd the 3rd execution personally
also he'd just seen god knows how many civilians and cops murdered hours before their touching little hand holding moment

reply

At that point they couldn't leave a live witness. So I see what you mean but that still goes against their "code" they usually are in and out without murder

reply

The cop knows that the members of a gang robbing a bank, armoured car or whatever are all equally guilty in the eyes of the law. I would have had more respect for the cop in the movie if he had simply knocked ash from a cigarette on him or spit on him.

reply

I agree and was frustrated you had to make your point three times. I got it the first time you said it and I thought you were dead on. Pachino’s character largely knew exactly how those armored guys died. He was routinely short tempered and threatening to the criminals he encounters who were guilty of a lot less. Then he holds Dinero’s hand at the end to comfort him? Seemed out of character.

reply

What a daffy non-reply. I said it's tempting -- they're not actually going to start kissing and sucking. The romanticization is that one of these guys kills the other's comrades (not 48 hours ago), but they hold hands at the end because of this abiding respect for one another.

It's also amusing the other airhead says "bingo" when you essentially restated what I had observed: In order to legitimize the drama, one must face overwhelming obstacles. To go with the chessplayer metaphor, a grandmaster doesn't defeat a 1200 player.

reply

Men of violence have an understanding of honour that may seem homo-erotic to softer, cosmopolitan men who have no concept of such things.

It's the same as when critics see homo-eroticism in the brotherhood of men at war and such... You see some modern writers try to avoid this, by making the characters neurotic or make them discuss their daddy issues while in the trenches, because as nebbish writers they probably do not have a concept of the non-gay bonds between men who rely on one another when in violent conflict. The exceptions are those who have studied history or the classics...

reply

This is another poster splashing in the shallow end of the pool. You're conflating brothers in arms with mortal enemies. From the perspective of honor culture, a member of Hanna's tribe had been claimed, which shouts out for a violent, personalized reprisal. Of course, in the coffee shop, Hanna speaks more from a post-honor culture, suggesting he will act as an agent of the state on behalf of some "poor bastard."

reply

(insert midwit insult to mirror previous poster)... I said men of violence. Consider Yakuza, European war in pre-WWI era, etc... Even against your opponent there is a sense of rules of engagement, this isn't done for erotic or brotherly reasons, rather it is an ancient understanding of the nature of actual physical conflict, i.e. the game theory of it.

The men in Heat are modern men, so are not from that earlier era and don't have the same customs, but there is something about being confronted with such violence, on a regular and iterative basis that generates this understanding... If you can't appreciate this, perhaps consider the mutual respect fighters have for one another in martial arts or fencing (even after bloodying one another, duelling scars, risking death in the ring), or even just a shared understanding that competitors have...

I mean, you're the one who can't comprehend the scene in Heat, perhaps you should get some boxing lessons or read some pre 20th century history or the classics... Go beyond mitwit modes of analysis... Appreciate the lower and higher forms of understanding...

reply

Your examples are good ones. Also reminded me of the opening battle in Gangs of New York. Priest Vallon and Bill the Butcher were sworn enemies. But after Bill took Priest's life, he held him and then declared to everyone that his body was to be left unmarred so that he could cross over to the next life "with honor."

reply

Again with the straw. I am not flummoxed at a sense of honor in fighting. This is necessary for almost all story-telling because protagonists (generally) play fair; if the hero were bested in hand-to-hand combat and desperately drew a knife, or blinded his opponent by throwing sand, then he probably wouldn't be the hero. Heroes also demonstrate mercy; they beat down the villain, but stop short of killing him. Then the villain grabs a gun, and the hero has permission to kill the bad guy, providing the audience with a cathartic moment. This is utterly elementary and requires no reference to the organized violence of yesteryear.

"The men in Heat are modern men, so are not from that earlier era and don't have the same customs, but there is something about being confronted with such violence, on a regular and iterative basis that generates this understanding..."

You're just embarrassing yourself. McCauley greenlights murdering unarmed security guards in one of the film's opening scenes -- y'know, the game theory of it. He's a bad guy, but Mann uses a common trope: He makes McCauley more sympathetic by inserting an even worse guy (a Swastika-sporting rapist-murderer). This sleight-of-hand helps promotes the false romanticization of an evil criminal (that's McCauley if you're having difficulty following along).

I guess I was able to "comprehend" the hand-holding until I wasn't. Until I thought about it. McCauley's responsible for killing and injuring umpteen people, including Pacino's blue tribesmen. Yet he holds hands and takes absolutely no satisfaction in putting the guy down.

reply

'daffy non-reply' , 'airhead', ' splashing in the shallow end of the pool'. What's your problem? What's the weather like up there on your high horse?

reply

All art is open to interpretation, but I've never regarded anything in this film as homoerotic. I think it's a very human thing to want to comfort someone in their final moments. I once saw an accident where one man cradled another man (total stranger) as he took his last breaths. After the ambulance left, the man walked back to his wife and said simply, He looked so scared.

I don't think Hanna grows from the experience. McCauley is just another in a long line of criminals that he's determined to stop. His job is his entire life. As he says in that great diner scene...I don't know how to do anything else.

reply

I wouldn't mind seeing the movie re-cut.

There's the scene where the guys are out to dinner with their wives, and the only one without a date is De Niro. Pacino quickly takes an interest, "Who's the loner?"

McCauley secretly photographs Hanna. Smiles mischievously.

There's the scene where Voight's character says, "He's all over you."
"Vice Sergeant says Hanna likes you."
"Three marriages, what do you think that means? He's one of those guys out there, prowling around, dedicated..."
"He's a hot dog."
Show McCauley weighing this information. Considering the possibilities.

Then Vincent takes McCauley out on a coffee date. "You have a woman?"

De Niro spends time with artist-lady, and Pacino explodes in a jealous rage, "I was havin' coffee with him!"

De Niro can get away. Voight tells him he's a free man. He can't go through with it. He shocks his woman by swerving at the last moment, reassuring her. Vincent tells Justine, "You don't want a man like me."

At the end, both leave their ladies to sword fight in the field.

I'm being facetious, but it's not much more ridiculous than holding hands with a cop-killing criminal. Their profound mutual respect at the end is a false note. It doesn't make sense.

reply

You seem pretty stuck on this "false note" view. I suppose all you're really looking for is for others to affirm your view. I don't happen to share it, but I can share this historical example. These soldiers had been slaughtering each other for months and yet they still acknowledged the humanity of their sworn enemies. They even made a film about it, Joyeux Noël.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_truce

This whole thread can be summed up in a few words...you think the ending seems phony and most others who have responded think it rings true & fits with the characters.

reply

And recently a mass-shooter's humanity was affirmed when a police officer remarked, "It was a bad day for him." It's difficult to imagine a similar utterance if the victims had included a half-dozen members of law enforcement. It's not impossible to imagine men who fought across a battle-field decades later reconciling and realizing they share a lot in common (and they never had much of a choice).

Sports are a proxy for war: We can understand why a Magic Johnson wanted to "destroy" Larry Bird in the 80s (and vice-versa), but now they're closer to each other than they are to many former teammates. Even more remarkable than a paroxysm of peace among men conscripted into bloodshed (and bamboozled into glorying in national violence that was supposed to be over within mere weeks) is the fact that war today between intergenerational rivals Germany and France is practically unthinkable. Time, memory, wounds, all of that.

The false note at the end is symptomatic of a larger romanticization, particularly on the criminal side (there's a similar dynamic at play in the original Point Break). I can see why a viewer connects Hanna and McCauley. That's what we're supposed to do. We're more or less equally exposed to De Niro and Pacino's characters. We don't see Hanna attending his co-workers' kids' birthday parties and graduations. All of those lived experiences are out of sight, out of mind.

reply

(there's a similar dynamic at play in the original Point Break).

good point, its done far far better in Point Break

reply

I don't see it.

Vincent probably regressed and eventually fled his soon-to-be-ex-wife's ex-husband's deadtech, post-modernistic, bullshit house. His stepdaughter would be sent to a mental facility where she eventually converts to Buddhism and she migrates to Bali where she opens up a therapy resort for troubled rich kids.

reply

It's not Dostoyevsky. ;-)

reply

Thank you for the interesting observation and comments in the thread. I can certainly see where you're coming from, as there are scenes which, perhaps if taken at face value, can have certain erotic implications.

I believe the relationship between the Neil and Vincent is not so much homoerotic, but is rather homosocial, as the film explores not only how the McCauley and Hanna interact, but how the men in the film act (Neil with crooks; Vincent with cops). While I agree that the film's main theme revolves around isolation and loneliness, I feel Heat explores deeper themes as well, especially as they pertain to modernity (e.g., emphasis of postmodern architecture, Vincent cursing Justine's postmodern home).

"At the end, both Neil and Vincent are alone, less, I think, to showcase the “final showdown” to which the drama has been moving than to emphasise their alienation from domesticity and forms of male organisation alike" (Christopher Sharrett, 2007). The females in the film assume a peripheral role. They do not participate in the compulsions of the men and, upon scrutiny, hinder Vincent and Neil from fulfilling their roles more efficiently (Vincent having to constantly justify his work; Neil having to explain the detour before killing Waingro to Eady). The mutual respect between Vincent and Neil is an implicit acknowledgement of where they both stand, as men, in the grand scheme of the contemporary and vacuous world—disconnected and alone. The characters have, in one form or another, forsaken domesticity: Vincent and Justine, Neil and Eady, even Donald. The domestic scenes are shown as suffocating and tainted by the ills of the postmodern world.

And so the film, set in 1995, marking film's centenary, accentuates that the codes of conduct which govern Neil and Vincent are on the "verge of collapse" (e.g., Vincent remarking on his step-daughter's father's absence; Neil and Waingro). Waingro is the postmodern hero (e.g., Anton Chigurh), having a different set of mores that he follows, alien to Vincent and Neil (both respectively representing the traditional and non-traditional hero).

The culminating shoot-out and subsequent hand-holding is not an erotic moment, in the conventional sense, but is rather a mutual understanding between men who operate within a framework, having a codex. All of this now is juxtaposed with the secondary focus of the film (e.g., Waingro, an individual who does not operate under a set of rules; and the postmodern architecture/city sprawl—empty and spiritually unfulfilling).

Isolation and loneliness notwithstanding, Heat also functions well as a civilizational survey of an era of ideals violently becoming a shibboleth as the cultural shift takes root.

reply

I've turned to ChatGPT for the answer on tragic flaws...

Vincent Hanna (Al Pacino):
Obsession: Hanna's tragic flaw is his obsession with catching criminals. While his dedication to his job as a detective is admirable, it leads to a lack of balance in his personal life, including strained relationships with his family. His obsession with catching Neil McCauley drives him to the brink and ultimately affects his mental and emotional well-being.

Neil McCauley (Robert De Niro):
Isolation: McCauley's tragic flaw is his inability to form meaningful connections with people. He leads a life of extreme professionalism and emotional detachment. This isolation keeps him from experiencing the kind of personal relationships and connections that could bring him happiness or a sense of fulfillment. It also ultimately leads to his downfall as he is unable to trust anyone, leading to his final confrontation with Hanna.


So Hanna's obsession isolates him. He can't hold down a marriage. When the call comes in for Neil at the hotel, he leaves his soon-to-be-ex-wife at the hospital. There's some push/pull in that relationship because when he's there, he's pretty great, but he's rarely present.

Neil's isolation is supposedly borne out of professional obligations. I think a lot of movies falsely romanticize criminals. Scott Rosenberg talked about this when researching the remake for Gone in 60 Seconds. He did the movie in part because he knew some guys in Boston who met every week to talk about cars. They had a passion for fine automobiles. Then he talked to thieves who had no romanticism. I've seen the same with professional card cheats. "This gets you the money." Their technique isn't even outstanding, but they're ballsy enough (and immoral enough) to do it. For McCauley, robbery is a means to an end.

I'm reminded of the old Internet joke, "Isn't it ironic pirates travel shore to shore looking for buried treasure when the REAL treasure was in the friendships they forged?"

reply

These guys got into their professions out of a pursuit of excellence, but in the process they should have forged close friendships. You can't have a tight crew otherwise. You can't be an excellent cop without relying on others. Now, these guys are the best of the best, so we can imagine how this might alienate them, but still...

reply