September 28, 2025 • 22 mins
The source provides a comprehensive overview of the heavily rumored Miami Vice reboot, set for release in August 2027 and directed by Joseph Kosinski. The central focus is the potential casting of Michael B. Jordan as Rico Tubbs and Glen Powell as Sonny Crockett, detailing why their respective careers—including Jordan's work in Creed and Powell's success in Top Gun: Maverick—make them ideal candidates to update the iconic detective roles. Furthermore, the episode explores the legacy of the original 1980s series and the cult status of the 2006 film adaptation, analyzing the challenges and high expectations surrounding this new high-octane iteration, which is reportedly being scripted by Dan Gilroy and filmed in IMAX. Ultimately, the article suggests the rumored pairing could redefine the action duo genre while navigating the pitfalls common to modern franchise reboots.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back to the deep dive. You know, the drill.
We sift through the noise, find the key info, and
well we lay it all up for you.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
And today we're tackling maybe the biggest Hollywood rumor floating
around right now. It's exciting, maybe a little.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Risky, definitely has that high stakes feel a lot riding
on this one.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
We're talking Miamivice the reboot, that's the one.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
And look, if you follow the industry buzz at all,
you know the conversation is laser focused on one thing.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
The casting. It's got everyone talking.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
The casting, absolutely specifically this idea that Universal is really
really chasing Michael B. Jordan and Glen.
Speaker 1 (00:38):
Powell as Tubs and Crockett. Wow, just saying it sounds
potentially amazing.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Stepping into those iconic loafers. Yeah, it's a big swing.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
And look, this isn't just fan casting on Twitter, is it.
Our sources are pointing to a pretty serious project taking
shape at Universal.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
Oh, it's way past chatter. We're talking a list talent attached. Yeah,
Joseph Kazinski's reportedly set to direct.
Speaker 1 (00:58):
The Top Gun. That immediately tells you something about the
scale they're aiming for.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Exactly massive scale, practical spectacle, and the writer Dan Gilroy
Night Crawler.
Speaker 1 (01:09):
Okay, that adds a whole other layer grit, intensity, moral complexity.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Right, So this isn't just, you know, let's slap the
name on something. They're assembling a serious creative team. They've
even apparently penciled in a release date August sixth, twenty
twenty seven.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Twenty twenty seven. So they're planning this.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Out properly, seems like it. So our mission today for
this deep dive is really to unpack all of this.
Can this specific combination Kazinski, Gilroy, Jordan Powell actually pull
this off?
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Yeah? Can they bridge that gap? You've got the like
the neon soaked eighties excess of the original and.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
The demands of a modern, maybe grittier, a certainly high
spectacle action movie for today's audience. It's a tough balance.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
So where do we start. We have to begin with
the original, right, the legacy.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Absolutely, you can't understand the challenge or the opportunity without
getting why the original Miami Vice was such a phenomenon.
Speaker 1 (01:59):
Because reboot it's not like rebooting just any old cop show.
The stakes feel incredibly high because that original series wasn't
just popular. It like to find a whole look, a
whole mood for the eighties.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
It really did. It was a cultural earthquake. Okay, so
the original Miami vice. To really get why rebooting it
is tricky, you got to understand how revolutionary it felt
back then. Anthony Yerukovich created it, but it was executive
producer Michael Mann whose vision really drove its success.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Right, Man, He basically used TV as his laboratory, didn't
he testing out styles and themes he'd later perfect in movies.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Absolutely. It ran on NBC nineteen eighty four to eighty nine,
five seasons, and he was doing things with visuals, with sound,
with mood that just weren't common on network television at
the time.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
And people responded. The ratings were huge, weren't they?
Speaker 2 (02:48):
Oh massive? At its peak, you're looking at over fifteen
million viewers tuning in each week. That's enormous reach. But
the core premise undercover cops in Miami fighting drug lords,
that was almost secondary, secondary to what to the vibe,
to the esthetic. Man was using the show consciously or not,
as a kind of visual critique of the Reagan era.
All that access, the money, the style. It was seductive
(03:12):
but also dangerous interesting.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
So it wasn't just celebrating the flash, it was commenting
on it too, exactly, and.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
The two main characters were central to that commentary. You
have to look at Crockett and Tubs.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
Let's start with Sonny Crockett, Don Johnson, I mean, just an.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Icon, total icon. He was this embodiment of like cool
but damaged masculinity. Lived on a sailboat with a pet
alligator named Elvis, right.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
Elvis the alligator. That detail says so much it does.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
And the car, the Ferrari daytona spider later the Testosa.
That wasn't just a car, it was a symbol pure
eighties aspirational wealth, the kind of thing the guys he
was chasing had.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
But the clothes, that's what everyone remembers, the Pastelrmanni jackets,
but then just a T shirt underneath, no socks precisely.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
That contrast was key. The expensive suits had he fit
into that high rolling world. But the T shirt, the
lack of socks, it signaled something else, maybe that the
luxury was borrowed, maybe that he wasn't fully buying into it.
He was the brooding one, you know, carried this weight,
this past trauma, Vietnam veteran backstory, and used the Miami
(04:14):
lifestyle almost like a shield.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
A very stylish sheeld, very stylish.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Yeah. And then you had Ricardo Rico Tubbs, played by
Philip Michael Thomas.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
He was the perfect foil the New Yorker grounded Crockett
a bit, maybe totally.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
He brought this street smart, East Coast energy that was
such a contrast to Crockett's sort of sun drenched Florida angst.
And crucially, Tubbs had the Cuban heritage, brought that cultural dimension.
He also has this really strong moral compass.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
So while Crockett might be getting lost in the undercover lifestyle,
Tubbs was the anchor.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
He's the one reminding Crockett and the audience what the
mission was. Where the lines were, that dynamic, that push
and pull between them was the heart of the show.
Yin and yank totally.
Speaker 1 (04:54):
Okay, So the characters were iconic, But you mentioned the
vibe earlier. Let's dig into that. The whole MT the
aesthetic thing.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Right, this is where man really broke round on TV.
He essentially brought a music video sensibility to prime time drama.
Before Wes, TV drama often looked well, kind of flat.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
How did he change that? What specifically did he do?
Speaker 2 (05:15):
Think about the visuals, He used techniques you'd usually only
see in films or yes, music videos. Yeah, big sweeping
crane shots over the water, slow motion during chases or shootouts,
set against these incredibly bright, almost artificial colors teal, pink, turquoise.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
Those colors became synonymous with the show and Miami itself.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
They did. It wasn't realism, it was heightened reality. It
was about capturing the mood of the city, the heat,
the danger, the glamour, And sometimes they just let the
visuals and the music carry a scene for minutes with
hardly any.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
Dialogue, which brings us to the music. You can't talk
Miami Bice without talking about the soundtrack.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Impossible. Yan Hammer's score unbelievable that synth heavy sound tracks
like Crocket's theme they were just background noise. They were
the show's pull.
Speaker 1 (06:00):
And it went mainstream right that the soundtrack album was huge.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Number one on the charts. A TV instrumental score hitting
number one that was unprecedented. And beyond the score, the
show used pop music in a way no one else was.
How So, they didn't just license generic tracks. They'd often
structure entire sequences around specific hit songs. I think Phil
Collins is in the Air, Tonight in the Pilot, or
(06:23):
tracks by Glenn Frey, Tina Turner, Gloria Stefan. Getting your
song on Miami Vice could launch your career or give
it a massive boost. It turned each episode into this
multimedia event.
Speaker 1 (06:35):
So it was visually groundbreaking, musically groundbreaking. The whole package
was just different.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
Completely different, And that's the legacy the reboot has to
contend with. Man didn't just make a cool cop show.
He was developing a signature style that focused on procedural detail,
the nocturnal city scapes, the existential loneliness of the characters,
the sudden burths of realistic violence, all the things that
would define films like Heat or collateral. Later on, you'd
see the DNA right there in Miami Vice.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Okay, so the bar is incredibly high, which makes looking
at the last attempt to bring Vice to the big
screen even more relevant. Right, let's talk about the two
thousand and six movie. Michael Mann himself directed it. Colin
Ferrell's Crockett Jamie Fox's tubs. It definitely made an impression.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
It did, and it's fascinating because Man made a very
conscious choice not to just replicate the TV show's style.
He went in a completely different direction tonally and visually.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
How so, what was the big shift?
Speaker 2 (07:29):
He ditched the Pastel's ditched the eighties glamour almost entirely. Instead,
he opted for this desaturated, greedy, almost documentary like feel,
lots of handheld camera work, low.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
Light, and he shot it on digital video right, which
was kind of a big deal back then for a
major movie, a huge deal.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
He used early high definition cameras, specifically the Thompson Viper
film stream, and that choice was crucial to the look.
It wasn't about warmth or nostalgia. It was about harsh clarity.
Speaker 1 (07:56):
Explain that a bit more. Why did the HD video
make such a difference.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Traditional film stock has grain, It softens light, it renders
color in a certain way. Think of the vibrant but
slightly dreedy look of The eighty Show. This early HD
video it captured everything, deep inky blacks in the night scenes,
sharp details, almost no grain. It gave the film this
very immediate unvarnished, almost cold look perfect for the story
(08:23):
he was telling, which was darker, more focused on the
bootle realities of global drug trafficking.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
So less about the style, more about the grim process exactly.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
The plot was complex, involving international ecstasy smugglers, white supremacist gangs,
undercover Feds. It demanded you pay attention to the tradecraft,
the logistics. It was man leaning into the procedural realism,
maybe even more than the character drama sometimes.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
How did that go down? At the time? The reception
was mixed?
Speaker 2 (08:50):
Was it very mixed? Some critics like Roger Ebert admired
its technical skill and his sheer cool, but others found
it emotionally distant, maybe a bit confusing. They missed the
charisma and the clearer narrative lines of the show.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
And commercially it struggled.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
Made about one hundred and sixty three million dollars worldwide
on a budget of around one hundred and thirty five
million dollars when you factor in marketing costs, it basically
just broke even maybe lost a bit, not the blockbuster
Universal was hoping for.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
Were there problems during filming too? I seem to remember
hearing about that.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
Oh yeah, it was reportedly a very difficult shoot. There
are weather issues, script changes, safety concerns. Apparently an onset
fire and an explosion injured some crew members. Tensions flared
between Man and the studio and even reportedly between the
stars at times. It wasn't smooth sailing.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
But interesting thing is that film's reputation has grown over time,
hasn't it massively?
Speaker 2 (09:41):
It's undergone a real critical reappraisal. Now you see it
popping up on Best of the two thousands lists. Critics
and cinophiles increasingly appreciates uncompromising vision, Man's signature fatalism and
that unique digital aesthetic. It found us audience eventually, just
maybe not the mainstream one initially.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
So the lesson there seems to be just imitating the
past isn't enough. You need a strong, maybe even divisive,
new vision, but also maybe don't make it quite so
difficult laughs. That's probably fair. You need clarity of vision,
but also maybe a smoother pass to getting it on screen,
which brings us neatly to the team Universal has supposedly
(10:20):
assembled for this twenty twenty seven attempt.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
Right, the new architects and this team signals a very
different approach.
Speaker 1 (10:26):
I think it really does. It leans back towards spectacle,
but hopefully with that necessary grit bake den.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
First up, the director, Joseph Kazinski, coming off.
Speaker 1 (10:36):
Top gun, Maverick, I mean, what more do you need
to say? That movie redefined blockbuster action filmmaking, one point
five billion dollars worldwide, incredible practical stunts.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
He knows how to create immersive, visceral experiences. His upcoming
F one movie sounds like it's pushing that even further.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
Exactly, He's the guy you hire if you want action
that feels real, that puts the audience right in the
cockpit or in this case maybe the speedboat or the ferrari.
And the reports say they're aiming to shoot this vice
in imax.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Imax. Okay, so big, big scale is the goal. Capturing
that Miami landscape, the speed, the action on the largest
possible canvas. That seems to be the mandate. He's also
grad at integrating technology visually, like in Oblivion or tron Legacy,
so he can handle the modern elements too.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
Okay, but here's my maybe slight reservation. Kazinsky is brilliant
at spectacle, no question, Maverick, was incredible, but it was
also quite straightforward emotionally, maybe even a bit triumphalist. Miami
Vice at its best has this vein of darkness, of
moral ambiguity. Can Kazinsky deliver that side too?
Speaker 2 (11:39):
That is the key question, isn't it? And maybe that's
where the screenwriter comes in is the crucial counterweight Dan Gilroy.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
Night Crawler Roman j Israel Esquire. He writes characters who
are obsessive, driving, operating in these morally gray areas, often
within corrupt systems.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
Precisely, Gilroy brings the moral bite as some of the
source of Put It Okay. He understands procedural d tail,
psychological tension. His involvement strongly suggests this won't just be
empty spectacle. It'll have substance, maybe a sharp edge.
Speaker 1 (12:06):
So what's Gilroy's big challenge here? He has to update
the Vice itself right The threats Crockett and Tub's face
can just be eighties cocaine cowboys exactly.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
The anxieties are different now. The original show tapped into
fears about Reaganomics, the crack epidemic, cold War echoes, and
the drug trade. Gilroy needs to find the twenty twenties equivalent.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
What could that look like? What are the sources speculating?
Speaker 2 (12:29):
Well, think about modern Miami. It's a global finance hub,
a tech hotspot, and still yes, a major port dealing
with complex issues. So you could see Gilroy exploring things
like cryptocurrency laundering on a massive.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
Scale, tracking bitcoin wallets instead of briefcases full of cash,
changes the whole game.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
For undercover work completely, or the fentonyl crisis. That's a
far more devastating insidious threat than cocaine was, with huge
social and public health implications. How do Crockett and Tugs
deal with that kind of despair? Not just the dealers?
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Could tech itself be the villain, like a tech bro
Calderone using AI or dark web marketplaces.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
That's definitely on the table. Or maybe exploring how climate
change rising sea levels impacting the ports creates new vulnerabilities
for smuggling. And then there's the whole surveillance state aspect.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
How do you even be undercover in twenty twenty seven
facial recognition everywhere, social media footprints.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
Gilroy could really dig into that. What if your cover's
blown not by an informant but by an accidental TikTok
video going viral, or what if the bad guys use
deep fakes to frame you? The potential for contemporary relevance
is huge if Gilroy tackles these kinds of questions.
Speaker 1 (13:39):
Okay, so the creative team looks strong, potentially a really
interesting blend of spectacle and substance, which finally brings us
to the guys rumored to be embodying Crockett and Tubs.
All right, the casting rumor that set the Internet on fire.
Michael B. Jordan as Rico Tubs, Glenn Powell as Sunny Crockett.
Let's break this down because the chem mysty between the
(14:00):
leads is Miami vice.
Speaker 2 (14:02):
It's everything, and this pairing on paper feels incredibly potent.
Let's start with Michael B. Jordan. He'd be playing Tubbs.
Speaker 1 (14:07):
Jordan's trajectory has been amazing to watch from Fruitvale Station,
showing that raw talent to becoming a global superstar with
Black Panther in the Creed movies.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
And what defines his best roles, I think is this
combination of physical presence and deep internal struggle. He carries weight.
He makes you believe in the character's history and conflicts.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
Which feels perfect for Tubbs. Doesn't it elevating him from
just the partner to a genuine co lead with his
own complex journey.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Absolutely, Tubbs in the original was the moral center, the
connection to a specific cultural background. Cuban New Yorker. Jordan
at thirty eight has the maturity and the skill to
really explore that. He doesn't just play heroes. He plays
layered human beings. Think Killmonger or his role in Jess Mercy.
He finds the nuance and.
Speaker 1 (14:54):
Tubbs needs that nuance. The blend of street Smart's loyalty,
cultural identity.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
And hint of an outsider's perspective in The Miami Heat. Plus,
knowing Jordan's work ethic, you can bet Heat dive deep
into the preparation like.
Speaker 1 (15:06):
He did for a Donna's creed the physical transformation, but
also understanding the character's world exactly.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
You'd expect him to spend time in Miami maybe little Havana,
work on the dialect, understand the cultural context sources, even
mention Tubb's love of salsa dancing in the original pision.
Maybe Jordan brings that back with authenticity.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
And importantly, Jordan is also a major producer now with
his company Outlier Society He champions diversity and authentic storytelling.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
Which is crucial here. His involvement practically guarantees that Tubb's
heritage won't be glossed over or turned into a stereotype.
It suggests Tubbs will be a fully realized character, potentially
the driving force of the partnership in many ways. Imagine
his focused intensity playing off Powell.
Speaker 1 (15:50):
Okay, let's talk Powell, Len Powell as Sunny Crockett. This
feels almost too perfect.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Does feel like destiny, doesn't it? Powell, who's thirty six
Austin Native, He's just loaded. In the last couple of years.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
Pop Gun Maverick was the launch pad, obviously playing hangman,
that swagger, that confidence, but with that hint of something
more underneath.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
That performance was basically his Miami Vice audition, especially being
directed by Kasinski. He nailed that blend of cocky, charm
and competence.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
And since then he's proven he can carry different kinds
of movies. The rom com Anyone But You was a
massive hit.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
Two hundred and twenty million dollars global. Yeah, showed off
his charisma and in a totally different genre, and then
twisters another huge blockbuster three hundred and seventy million dollars.
He's got that old school movie star quality.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
People use words like effortless, cool, dripping charisma. That's pure
Crocket it is.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
But Crockett, remember, isn't just cool. He's masking something. In
the original it was Vietnam trauma. In a reboot, it
needs to be some modern equivalent, maybe a past operation
gone wrong, a betrayal, something that fuels the hedonism.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Can pal do that go beyond the charm.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
I think Hangman showed he can. There were moments, especially
near the end of Maverick, where you saw the vulnerability
beneath the bravado. He can definitely play that Southern charm
suppressing cynicism angle that Crockett needs. He's got the twinkle
in his eye, but you need to believe there's some
darkness there too.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
So the core appeal is putting these two together, Jordan's intensity,
Powell's laid back swagger, fire and ice exactly.
Speaker 2 (17:19):
That The original worked because Johnson and Thomas had that
contrasting energy but underlying respect. Jordan and Powell promise a
modern version of that dynamic, Powell's maybe looser, slier style
rubbing up against Jordan's discipline focus. That friction is where
the magic happens.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
It feels like a pairing that could genuinely redefine the
buddy cop dynamic for a new era.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
It really could. And one small thing. Powell recently talked
about James Bond rumors and said the part should go
to a British actor. It shows a certain self awareness,
maybe a humility that suggests he wouldn't let Crockett's ego
completely overshadow the partnership. That balance is key.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
Okay, So the potential is huge and the reaction and
when this news first broke what was it, September twenty eighth,
twenty twenty five, the Internet basically lost its mind.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
It really did. You saw it everywhere, especially on platforms
like X discussing film's posts got massive engagement. People weren't
just interested, they were excited, calling the pairing inspired perfecto.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
The hype is real, which inevitably leads to the money
side of things. With this level of talent, this isn't going.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
To be cheap, not a chance. You've got Kasinski, who
commands a premium after Maverick, You've got two bona fide
a listors in Jordan Powell you're shooting an imax, likely
with significant practical action sequences. The budget's got to be
north of one hundred and fifty million dollars easy, maybe
closer to two hundred million dollars.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
And the box office target for Universal.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
They have to be amy high, really high. Something like
five hundred million dollars worldwide feels like the benchmark they'd
need to hit to call this a success and potentially
launch a franchise.
Speaker 1 (18:51):
Is that realistic.
Speaker 2 (18:52):
It's ambitious, but maybe not impossible. Jordan's Creed the Third
pulled in two hundred and seventy six million dollars, Powell
Twisters hit three hundred and seventy millionllion dollars. Combine their
drawing power, the Miami Vice brand recognition, Kazinski's spectacle. It's plausible,
but there's zero room for air. They need a global hit.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
Which puts immense pressure on that script by Gilroy. We
talked about the modern threats crypto fentanyl tech, but he
really needs to nail the execution right how these crimes
actually work in the story.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
Absolutely, it can't just be buzzwords. If they're dealing with cryptocartels,
you need to see the challenges how do you trace
decentralized money? Do they need tech specialists on the team?
Does that create new tensions? It has to feel grounded
in the how.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
And the fentanyl angle. That requires a different tone, maybe
less glamorous, more tragic.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
It has to I think, Yeah, you can't treat a
fentanyl trisis storyline with the same stylized detachment the original
show sometimes had towards cocaine. It demands more empathy. Maybe
you'll look at the victims, the community impact. That could
add real depth if handled right.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
But with big ambitions come big risks. We already mentioned
the trouble production of the two thousand and six film.
What are the other potential pitfalls here? Well?
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Staying true to the spirit while updating it is always tricky.
There's the tonal balance. How dark is too dark? How
much style is too much? You want it to be
cool but not frivolous, moody but not just miserable.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
Sources mentioned aiming for a blend like Drives aesthetic with
the town's heist realism.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
Yeah, that feels like a good target. Sleek visuals, synth
heavy score maybe, but paired with visceral, grounded action and
real procedural stakes. The dangers always that you either sanitize
it too much for a PG thirteen.
Speaker 1 (20:32):
Rating, losing the vice in Miami vice exactly.
Speaker 2 (20:35):
Or you lean so hard into grit that you lose
the distinctive style that made it iconic in the first place.
And relying too much on CGI instead of practical stunts
would be a mistake, especially with Kazinski directing.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
What about the cultural aspects, specifically Tubb's heritage.
Speaker 2 (20:50):
That needs careful handling. Jordan's involvement is a positive sign,
as we discussed, but the film needs to ensure Miami's
diverse culture, particularly its Cuban and Latin influences, feel in
to this story, not just set dressing. Avoid tokenism, avoid cliches,
make it authentic.
Speaker 1 (21:06):
So it sounds like the potential is sky high, but
the tightrope they have to walk is incredibly narrow.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
That's the perfect way to put it. This isn't about nostalgiabate.
It's about taking an iconic framework, plugging in two electrifying stars,
backing them with top tier spectacle via Kazinski and Imax,
and grounding it all in a complex contemporary narrative from
Gilroy it's ambitious.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
It really feels like a test case, doesn't it. How
does Hollywood reinvent this kind of iconic property for today,
not just remake it, but make it relevant again.
Speaker 2 (21:36):
It's absolutely a pulse check. Can they capture the anxieties
and complexities of our time the way the original captured
the eighties? If they pull it off, it could set
a new standard. If not, well, it joined the long
list of reboots that couldn't recapture the magic.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
Okay, that tees up our final thought perfectly. We want
to leave you, the listener, with something to chew on.
Speaker 2 (21:54):
Go for it.
Speaker 1 (21:55):
The original Miami Vice was brilliant at using its style
to critique the specific exit of its era, the eraganomics,
the drug boom, that kind of surface glamour hiding corruption.
So thinking about this new team Kazinski's spectacle, Gilray's focus
on moral ambiguity and modern systems, What specific complex, cultural
anxiety or institution unique to the twenty twenties do you
(22:16):
think this twenty twenty seven film will zero in on?
Will it be the smoke and mirrors world of crypto finance,
the ethics of AI surveillance and predictive policing the hidden
costs of globalized trade flowing through Miami's ports. What modern
vice will this film put under the microscope to make
it resonate deeply with a new generation
Welcome back to the deep dive. You know, the drill.
We sift through the noise, find the key info, and
well we lay it all up for you.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
And today we're tackling maybe the biggest Hollywood rumor floating
around right now. It's exciting, maybe a little.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Risky, definitely has that high stakes feel a lot riding
on this one.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
We're talking Miamivice the reboot, that's the one.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
And look, if you follow the industry buzz at all,
you know the conversation is laser focused on one thing.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
The casting. It's got everyone talking.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
The casting, absolutely specifically this idea that Universal is really
really chasing Michael B. Jordan and Glen.
Speaker 1 (00:38):
Powell as Tubs and Crockett. Wow, just saying it sounds
potentially amazing.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Stepping into those iconic loafers. Yeah, it's a big swing.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
And look, this isn't just fan casting on Twitter, is it.
Our sources are pointing to a pretty serious project taking
shape at Universal.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
Oh, it's way past chatter. We're talking a list talent attached. Yeah,
Joseph Kazinski's reportedly set to direct.
Speaker 1 (00:58):
The Top Gun. That immediately tells you something about the
scale they're aiming for.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Exactly massive scale, practical spectacle, and the writer Dan Gilroy
Night Crawler.
Speaker 1 (01:09):
Okay, that adds a whole other layer grit, intensity, moral complexity.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Right, So this isn't just, you know, let's slap the
name on something. They're assembling a serious creative team. They've
even apparently penciled in a release date August sixth, twenty
twenty seven.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Twenty twenty seven. So they're planning this.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Out properly, seems like it. So our mission today for
this deep dive is really to unpack all of this.
Can this specific combination Kazinski, Gilroy, Jordan Powell actually pull
this off?
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Yeah? Can they bridge that gap? You've got the like
the neon soaked eighties excess of the original and.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
The demands of a modern, maybe grittier, a certainly high
spectacle action movie for today's audience. It's a tough balance.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
So where do we start. We have to begin with
the original, right, the legacy.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Absolutely, you can't understand the challenge or the opportunity without
getting why the original Miami Vice was such a phenomenon.
Speaker 1 (01:59):
Because reboot it's not like rebooting just any old cop show.
The stakes feel incredibly high because that original series wasn't
just popular. It like to find a whole look, a
whole mood for the eighties.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
It really did. It was a cultural earthquake. Okay, so
the original Miami vice. To really get why rebooting it
is tricky, you got to understand how revolutionary it felt
back then. Anthony Yerukovich created it, but it was executive
producer Michael Mann whose vision really drove its success.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
Right, Man, He basically used TV as his laboratory, didn't
he testing out styles and themes he'd later perfect in movies.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Absolutely. It ran on NBC nineteen eighty four to eighty nine,
five seasons, and he was doing things with visuals, with sound,
with mood that just weren't common on network television at
the time.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
And people responded. The ratings were huge, weren't they?
Speaker 2 (02:48):
Oh massive? At its peak, you're looking at over fifteen
million viewers tuning in each week. That's enormous reach. But
the core premise undercover cops in Miami fighting drug lords,
that was almost secondary, secondary to what to the vibe,
to the esthetic. Man was using the show consciously or not,
as a kind of visual critique of the Reagan era.
All that access, the money, the style. It was seductive
(03:12):
but also dangerous interesting.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
So it wasn't just celebrating the flash, it was commenting
on it too, exactly, and.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
The two main characters were central to that commentary. You
have to look at Crockett and Tubs.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
Let's start with Sonny Crockett, Don Johnson, I mean, just an.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
Icon, total icon. He was this embodiment of like cool
but damaged masculinity. Lived on a sailboat with a pet
alligator named Elvis, right.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
Elvis the alligator. That detail says so much it does.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
And the car, the Ferrari daytona spider later the Testosa.
That wasn't just a car, it was a symbol pure
eighties aspirational wealth, the kind of thing the guys he
was chasing had.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
But the clothes, that's what everyone remembers, the Pastelrmanni jackets,
but then just a T shirt underneath, no socks precisely.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
That contrast was key. The expensive suits had he fit
into that high rolling world. But the T shirt, the
lack of socks, it signaled something else, maybe that the
luxury was borrowed, maybe that he wasn't fully buying into it.
He was the brooding one, you know, carried this weight,
this past trauma, Vietnam veteran backstory, and used the Miami
(04:14):
lifestyle almost like a shield.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
A very stylish sheeld, very stylish.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Yeah. And then you had Ricardo Rico Tubbs, played by
Philip Michael Thomas.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
He was the perfect foil the New Yorker grounded Crockett
a bit, maybe totally.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
He brought this street smart, East Coast energy that was
such a contrast to Crockett's sort of sun drenched Florida angst.
And crucially, Tubbs had the Cuban heritage, brought that cultural dimension.
He also has this really strong moral compass.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
So while Crockett might be getting lost in the undercover lifestyle,
Tubbs was the anchor.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
He's the one reminding Crockett and the audience what the
mission was. Where the lines were, that dynamic, that push
and pull between them was the heart of the show.
Yin and yank totally.
Speaker 1 (04:54):
Okay, So the characters were iconic, But you mentioned the
vibe earlier. Let's dig into that. The whole MT the
aesthetic thing.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Right, this is where man really broke round on TV.
He essentially brought a music video sensibility to prime time drama.
Before Wes, TV drama often looked well, kind of flat.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
How did he change that? What specifically did he do?
Speaker 2 (05:15):
Think about the visuals, He used techniques you'd usually only
see in films or yes, music videos. Yeah, big sweeping
crane shots over the water, slow motion during chases or shootouts,
set against these incredibly bright, almost artificial colors teal, pink, turquoise.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
Those colors became synonymous with the show and Miami itself.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
They did. It wasn't realism, it was heightened reality. It
was about capturing the mood of the city, the heat,
the danger, the glamour, And sometimes they just let the
visuals and the music carry a scene for minutes with
hardly any.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
Dialogue, which brings us to the music. You can't talk
Miami Bice without talking about the soundtrack.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Impossible. Yan Hammer's score unbelievable that synth heavy sound tracks
like Crocket's theme they were just background noise. They were
the show's pull.
Speaker 1 (06:00):
And it went mainstream right that the soundtrack album was huge.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Number one on the charts. A TV instrumental score hitting
number one that was unprecedented. And beyond the score, the
show used pop music in a way no one else was.
How So, they didn't just license generic tracks. They'd often
structure entire sequences around specific hit songs. I think Phil
Collins is in the Air, Tonight in the Pilot, or
(06:23):
tracks by Glenn Frey, Tina Turner, Gloria Stefan. Getting your
song on Miami Vice could launch your career or give
it a massive boost. It turned each episode into this
multimedia event.
Speaker 1 (06:35):
So it was visually groundbreaking, musically groundbreaking. The whole package
was just different.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
Completely different, And that's the legacy the reboot has to
contend with. Man didn't just make a cool cop show.
He was developing a signature style that focused on procedural detail,
the nocturnal city scapes, the existential loneliness of the characters,
the sudden burths of realistic violence, all the things that
would define films like Heat or collateral. Later on, you'd
see the DNA right there in Miami Vice.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Okay, so the bar is incredibly high, which makes looking
at the last attempt to bring Vice to the big
screen even more relevant. Right, let's talk about the two
thousand and six movie. Michael Mann himself directed it. Colin
Ferrell's Crockett Jamie Fox's tubs. It definitely made an impression.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
It did, and it's fascinating because Man made a very
conscious choice not to just replicate the TV show's style.
He went in a completely different direction tonally and visually.
Speaker 1 (07:27):
How so, what was the big shift?
Speaker 2 (07:29):
He ditched the Pastel's ditched the eighties glamour almost entirely. Instead,
he opted for this desaturated, greedy, almost documentary like feel,
lots of handheld camera work, low.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
Light, and he shot it on digital video right, which
was kind of a big deal back then for a
major movie, a huge deal.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
He used early high definition cameras, specifically the Thompson Viper
film stream, and that choice was crucial to the look.
It wasn't about warmth or nostalgia. It was about harsh clarity.
Speaker 1 (07:56):
Explain that a bit more. Why did the HD video
make such a difference.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Traditional film stock has grain, It softens light, it renders
color in a certain way. Think of the vibrant but
slightly dreedy look of The eighty Show. This early HD
video it captured everything, deep inky blacks in the night scenes,
sharp details, almost no grain. It gave the film this
very immediate unvarnished, almost cold look perfect for the story
(08:23):
he was telling, which was darker, more focused on the
bootle realities of global drug trafficking.
Speaker 1 (08:28):
So less about the style, more about the grim process exactly.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
The plot was complex, involving international ecstasy smugglers, white supremacist gangs,
undercover Feds. It demanded you pay attention to the tradecraft,
the logistics. It was man leaning into the procedural realism,
maybe even more than the character drama sometimes.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
How did that go down? At the time? The reception
was mixed?
Speaker 2 (08:50):
Was it very mixed? Some critics like Roger Ebert admired
its technical skill and his sheer cool, but others found
it emotionally distant, maybe a bit confusing. They missed the
charisma and the clearer narrative lines of the show.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
And commercially it struggled.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
Made about one hundred and sixty three million dollars worldwide
on a budget of around one hundred and thirty five
million dollars when you factor in marketing costs, it basically
just broke even maybe lost a bit, not the blockbuster
Universal was hoping for.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
Were there problems during filming too? I seem to remember
hearing about that.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
Oh yeah, it was reportedly a very difficult shoot. There
are weather issues, script changes, safety concerns. Apparently an onset
fire and an explosion injured some crew members. Tensions flared
between Man and the studio and even reportedly between the
stars at times. It wasn't smooth sailing.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
But interesting thing is that film's reputation has grown over time,
hasn't it massively?
Speaker 2 (09:41):
It's undergone a real critical reappraisal. Now you see it
popping up on Best of the two thousands lists. Critics
and cinophiles increasingly appreciates uncompromising vision, Man's signature fatalism and
that unique digital aesthetic. It found us audience eventually, just
maybe not the mainstream one initially.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
So the lesson there seems to be just imitating the
past isn't enough. You need a strong, maybe even divisive,
new vision, but also maybe don't make it quite so
difficult laughs. That's probably fair. You need clarity of vision,
but also maybe a smoother pass to getting it on screen,
which brings us neatly to the team Universal has supposedly
(10:20):
assembled for this twenty twenty seven attempt.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
Right, the new architects and this team signals a very
different approach.
Speaker 1 (10:26):
I think it really does. It leans back towards spectacle,
but hopefully with that necessary grit bake den.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
First up, the director, Joseph Kazinski, coming off.
Speaker 1 (10:36):
Top gun, Maverick, I mean, what more do you need
to say? That movie redefined blockbuster action filmmaking, one point
five billion dollars worldwide, incredible practical stunts.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
He knows how to create immersive, visceral experiences. His upcoming
F one movie sounds like it's pushing that even further.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
Exactly, He's the guy you hire if you want action
that feels real, that puts the audience right in the
cockpit or in this case maybe the speedboat or the ferrari.
And the reports say they're aiming to shoot this vice
in imax.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Imax. Okay, so big, big scale is the goal. Capturing
that Miami landscape, the speed, the action on the largest
possible canvas. That seems to be the mandate. He's also
grad at integrating technology visually, like in Oblivion or tron Legacy,
so he can handle the modern elements too.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
Okay, but here's my maybe slight reservation. Kazinsky is brilliant
at spectacle, no question, Maverick, was incredible, but it was
also quite straightforward emotionally, maybe even a bit triumphalist. Miami
Vice at its best has this vein of darkness, of
moral ambiguity. Can Kazinsky deliver that side too?
Speaker 2 (11:39):
That is the key question, isn't it? And maybe that's
where the screenwriter comes in is the crucial counterweight Dan Gilroy.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
Night Crawler Roman j Israel Esquire. He writes characters who
are obsessive, driving, operating in these morally gray areas, often
within corrupt systems.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
Precisely, Gilroy brings the moral bite as some of the
source of Put It Okay. He understands procedural d tail,
psychological tension. His involvement strongly suggests this won't just be
empty spectacle. It'll have substance, maybe a sharp edge.
Speaker 1 (12:06):
So what's Gilroy's big challenge here? He has to update
the Vice itself right The threats Crockett and Tub's face
can just be eighties cocaine cowboys exactly.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
The anxieties are different now. The original show tapped into
fears about Reaganomics, the crack epidemic, cold War echoes, and
the drug trade. Gilroy needs to find the twenty twenties equivalent.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
What could that look like? What are the sources speculating?
Speaker 2 (12:29):
Well, think about modern Miami. It's a global finance hub,
a tech hotspot, and still yes, a major port dealing
with complex issues. So you could see Gilroy exploring things
like cryptocurrency laundering on a massive.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
Scale, tracking bitcoin wallets instead of briefcases full of cash,
changes the whole game.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
For undercover work completely, or the fentonyl crisis. That's a
far more devastating insidious threat than cocaine was, with huge
social and public health implications. How do Crockett and Tugs
deal with that kind of despair? Not just the dealers?
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Could tech itself be the villain, like a tech bro
Calderone using AI or dark web marketplaces.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
That's definitely on the table. Or maybe exploring how climate
change rising sea levels impacting the ports creates new vulnerabilities
for smuggling. And then there's the whole surveillance state aspect.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
How do you even be undercover in twenty twenty seven
facial recognition everywhere, social media footprints.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
Gilroy could really dig into that. What if your cover's
blown not by an informant but by an accidental TikTok
video going viral, or what if the bad guys use
deep fakes to frame you? The potential for contemporary relevance
is huge if Gilroy tackles these kinds of questions.
Speaker 1 (13:39):
Okay, so the creative team looks strong, potentially a really
interesting blend of spectacle and substance, which finally brings us
to the guys rumored to be embodying Crockett and Tubs.
All right, the casting rumor that set the Internet on fire.
Michael B. Jordan as Rico Tubs, Glenn Powell as Sunny Crockett.
Let's break this down because the chem mysty between the
(14:00):
leads is Miami vice.
Speaker 2 (14:02):
It's everything, and this pairing on paper feels incredibly potent.
Let's start with Michael B. Jordan. He'd be playing Tubbs.
Speaker 1 (14:07):
Jordan's trajectory has been amazing to watch from Fruitvale Station,
showing that raw talent to becoming a global superstar with
Black Panther in the Creed movies.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
And what defines his best roles, I think is this
combination of physical presence and deep internal struggle. He carries weight.
He makes you believe in the character's history and conflicts.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
Which feels perfect for Tubbs. Doesn't it elevating him from
just the partner to a genuine co lead with his
own complex journey.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
Absolutely, Tubbs in the original was the moral center, the
connection to a specific cultural background. Cuban New Yorker. Jordan
at thirty eight has the maturity and the skill to
really explore that. He doesn't just play heroes. He plays
layered human beings. Think Killmonger or his role in Jess Mercy.
He finds the nuance and.
Speaker 1 (14:54):
Tubbs needs that nuance. The blend of street Smart's loyalty,
cultural identity.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
And hint of an outsider's perspective in The Miami Heat. Plus,
knowing Jordan's work ethic, you can bet Heat dive deep
into the preparation like.
Speaker 1 (15:06):
He did for a Donna's creed the physical transformation, but
also understanding the character's world exactly.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
You'd expect him to spend time in Miami maybe little Havana,
work on the dialect, understand the cultural context sources, even
mention Tubb's love of salsa dancing in the original pision.
Maybe Jordan brings that back with authenticity.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
And importantly, Jordan is also a major producer now with
his company Outlier Society He champions diversity and authentic storytelling.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
Which is crucial here. His involvement practically guarantees that Tubb's
heritage won't be glossed over or turned into a stereotype.
It suggests Tubbs will be a fully realized character, potentially
the driving force of the partnership in many ways. Imagine
his focused intensity playing off Powell.
Speaker 1 (15:50):
Okay, let's talk Powell, Len Powell as Sunny Crockett. This
feels almost too perfect.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Does feel like destiny, doesn't it? Powell, who's thirty six
Austin Native, He's just loaded. In the last couple of years.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
Pop Gun Maverick was the launch pad, obviously playing hangman,
that swagger, that confidence, but with that hint of something
more underneath.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
That performance was basically his Miami Vice audition, especially being
directed by Kasinski. He nailed that blend of cocky, charm
and competence.
Speaker 1 (16:17):
And since then he's proven he can carry different kinds
of movies. The rom com Anyone But You was a
massive hit.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
Two hundred and twenty million dollars global. Yeah, showed off
his charisma and in a totally different genre, and then
twisters another huge blockbuster three hundred and seventy million dollars.
He's got that old school movie star quality.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
People use words like effortless, cool, dripping charisma. That's pure
Crocket it is.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
But Crockett, remember, isn't just cool. He's masking something. In
the original it was Vietnam trauma. In a reboot, it
needs to be some modern equivalent, maybe a past operation
gone wrong, a betrayal, something that fuels the hedonism.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Can pal do that go beyond the charm.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
I think Hangman showed he can. There were moments, especially
near the end of Maverick, where you saw the vulnerability
beneath the bravado. He can definitely play that Southern charm
suppressing cynicism angle that Crockett needs. He's got the twinkle
in his eye, but you need to believe there's some
darkness there too.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
So the core appeal is putting these two together, Jordan's intensity,
Powell's laid back swagger, fire and ice exactly.
Speaker 2 (17:19):
That The original worked because Johnson and Thomas had that
contrasting energy but underlying respect. Jordan and Powell promise a
modern version of that dynamic, Powell's maybe looser, slier style
rubbing up against Jordan's discipline focus. That friction is where
the magic happens.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
It feels like a pairing that could genuinely redefine the
buddy cop dynamic for a new era.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
It really could. And one small thing. Powell recently talked
about James Bond rumors and said the part should go
to a British actor. It shows a certain self awareness,
maybe a humility that suggests he wouldn't let Crockett's ego
completely overshadow the partnership. That balance is key.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
Okay, So the potential is huge and the reaction and
when this news first broke what was it, September twenty eighth,
twenty twenty five, the Internet basically lost its mind.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
It really did. You saw it everywhere, especially on platforms
like X discussing film's posts got massive engagement. People weren't
just interested, they were excited, calling the pairing inspired perfecto.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
The hype is real, which inevitably leads to the money
side of things. With this level of talent, this isn't going.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
To be cheap, not a chance. You've got Kasinski, who
commands a premium after Maverick, You've got two bona fide
a listors in Jordan Powell you're shooting an imax, likely
with significant practical action sequences. The budget's got to be
north of one hundred and fifty million dollars easy, maybe
closer to two hundred million dollars.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
And the box office target for Universal.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
They have to be amy high, really high. Something like
five hundred million dollars worldwide feels like the benchmark they'd
need to hit to call this a success and potentially
launch a franchise.
Speaker 1 (18:51):
Is that realistic.
Speaker 2 (18:52):
It's ambitious, but maybe not impossible. Jordan's Creed the Third
pulled in two hundred and seventy six million dollars, Powell
Twisters hit three hundred and seventy millionllion dollars. Combine their
drawing power, the Miami Vice brand recognition, Kazinski's spectacle. It's plausible,
but there's zero room for air. They need a global hit.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
Which puts immense pressure on that script by Gilroy. We
talked about the modern threats crypto fentanyl tech, but he
really needs to nail the execution right how these crimes
actually work in the story.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
Absolutely, it can't just be buzzwords. If they're dealing with cryptocartels,
you need to see the challenges how do you trace
decentralized money? Do they need tech specialists on the team?
Does that create new tensions? It has to feel grounded
in the how.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
And the fentanyl angle. That requires a different tone, maybe
less glamorous, more tragic.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
It has to I think, Yeah, you can't treat a
fentanyl trisis storyline with the same stylized detachment the original
show sometimes had towards cocaine. It demands more empathy. Maybe
you'll look at the victims, the community impact. That could
add real depth if handled right.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
But with big ambitions come big risks. We already mentioned
the trouble production of the two thousand and six film.
What are the other potential pitfalls here? Well?
Speaker 2 (20:01):
Staying true to the spirit while updating it is always tricky.
There's the tonal balance. How dark is too dark? How
much style is too much? You want it to be
cool but not frivolous, moody but not just miserable.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
Sources mentioned aiming for a blend like Drives aesthetic with
the town's heist realism.
Speaker 2 (20:18):
Yeah, that feels like a good target. Sleek visuals, synth
heavy score maybe, but paired with visceral, grounded action and
real procedural stakes. The dangers always that you either sanitize
it too much for a PG thirteen.
Speaker 1 (20:32):
Rating, losing the vice in Miami vice exactly.
Speaker 2 (20:35):
Or you lean so hard into grit that you lose
the distinctive style that made it iconic in the first place.
And relying too much on CGI instead of practical stunts
would be a mistake, especially with Kazinski directing.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
What about the cultural aspects, specifically Tubb's heritage.
Speaker 2 (20:50):
That needs careful handling. Jordan's involvement is a positive sign,
as we discussed, but the film needs to ensure Miami's
diverse culture, particularly its Cuban and Latin influences, feel in
to this story, not just set dressing. Avoid tokenism, avoid cliches,
make it authentic.
Speaker 1 (21:06):
So it sounds like the potential is sky high, but
the tightrope they have to walk is incredibly narrow.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
That's the perfect way to put it. This isn't about nostalgiabate.
It's about taking an iconic framework, plugging in two electrifying stars,
backing them with top tier spectacle via Kazinski and Imax,
and grounding it all in a complex contemporary narrative from
Gilroy it's ambitious.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
It really feels like a test case, doesn't it. How
does Hollywood reinvent this kind of iconic property for today,
not just remake it, but make it relevant again.
Speaker 2 (21:36):
It's absolutely a pulse check. Can they capture the anxieties
and complexities of our time the way the original captured
the eighties? If they pull it off, it could set
a new standard. If not, well, it joined the long
list of reboots that couldn't recapture the magic.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
Okay, that tees up our final thought perfectly. We want
to leave you, the listener, with something to chew on.
Speaker 2 (21:54):
Go for it.
Speaker 1 (21:55):
The original Miami Vice was brilliant at using its style
to critique the specific exit of its era, the eraganomics,
the drug boom, that kind of surface glamour hiding corruption.
So thinking about this new team Kazinski's spectacle, Gilray's focus
on moral ambiguity and modern systems, What specific complex, cultural
anxiety or institution unique to the twenty twenties do you
(22:16):
think this twenty twenty seven film will zero in on?
Will it be the smoke and mirrors world of crypto finance,
the ethics of AI surveillance and predictive policing the hidden
costs of globalized trade flowing through Miami's ports. What modern
vice will this film put under the microscope to make
it resonate deeply with a new generation
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.