ThedevilChoose
When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.
Geraldine
The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
Andy (film-critic)
As a preliminary draft to "Heat", Mann's made-for-TV crime drama about a gung-ho cop and a professional criminal works. It lays the foundation for the bigger-budget film in which Pacino and De Niro hone their chops, but as a stand alone film – "LA Takedown" (or as I watched it "Made in LA") is a dated, censored look at a bigger picture. Having watched "Heat" first, and several times over, it is difficult not to make comparisons between the two films. It is reminiscent of watching the original "Gaslight" and the remake produced just four years later – while in that case the original is better – one cannot help but compare the differences. That is the case with Mann's TV outing. While it is impressive to see that Mann stuck with his original story, it is the characters that fail to live up to the "Heat" hype. Scott Plank and Alex McArthur are good actors, but they are no icons. Their squabble between each other seems staged, less emotional, and not quite as tense as seen in the later film. McArthur isn't as smart, Plank isn't as gruff, and what makes it work in "Heat" is the back story Mann creates. The world surrounding our characters in "Heat" makes them believable, more than just characters on a page – while in this film, running at just an hour and a half, it is difficult to believe each character's squabbles. Both films are a character driven film, with two intense scenes of action, but without the characters, we couldn't have created the moments. I believe Mann realized that with "LA Takedown", and it is why "Heat" seems to focus more intently on our players.Again, I am not one that likes to say one is obviously better than the other, but when looked out separately, "LA Takedown" would feel dated, tired, and confusing. It isn't a film to be remembered, which is why it probably hasn't been transferred to DVD yet, and perhaps forgotten for good. "Heat" takes every lacking element in this original draft and powerfully re-masters it using stronger actors, other plot lines, and a clear definition of "why".Overall, I liked this original film merely for the idea. The concept that was finally redefined as "Heat" is perhaps not quiet as welcomed in 1989, but "LA Takedown" could not be watched again. In the catalogue of Mann films, it is important to see, but it is not as emotionally powerful or kinetically charged as "Heat". With an unfocused story and minimal character development (with plenty of yelling – a classic 80s answer to building tension), "LA Takedown" doesn't give hope for the early made-for-TV movie, but it does showcase Mann's ideas. As a teacher, I would ask Mann to rewrite and develop further, and with his answer as being "Heat", the project would then be complete.Watch this film once, but upgrade yourself accordingly.Grade: ** out of *****
roger-hepburn
this is a far better film than its rating suggests, in point of fact it is superior in many ways to the remake HEAT. The movie rests solely on the performances of the actors and the writer/director rather than on any star attractions or hype (pacino and De Nero have both made far better films and put in far better performances). There are a few good set pieces in here and a myriad of fine acting performances from both the leads and the supporting cast. The fact that the re-make was relatively faithful to the original is in itself a bit of a homage and where the two films really differ is in the action sequences that overtake the story in the remake, if you want to watch a more intelligent and somewhat darker crime thriller then I recommend this before HEAT every time this should be given the credit it deserves as it was pieces like this that have allowed Mann to make a lot of the mainstream pulp films he is famous for.
johancarlmark
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"
halfcolombian
This movie is basically the same movie as HEAT. To say that this movie is garbage and that HEAT is a masterpiece is plain stupid, but that's almost how the IMDB users voted. Last time I checked this movie had an average rating of 5.7 while HEAT had 7.8. Anyway I don't need any Pacino or De Niro to recognize a good movie. HEAT might be a little better but it's not THAT much better. Had I seen this movie first I don't know if I had bothered seing HEAT, but sadly the big remakes get all the attention. Soon the remake of another excellent movie "manhunter" will come up in the theatres, and it will probably make people forget about how good the original is and if there are people that still haven't seen it, they will only see the remake. I don't think you should do remakes of movies that are less than 20 or 30 years old. I think I'm against almost any remake. If the original is good then why do a remake? and if it's bad well even less reason to do it...Anyway both movies are good and I like them both even if I don't like the remake phenomenon.
