MovieChat Forums > Marlon Brando Discussion > Why did anyone hire this clown after abo...

Why did anyone hire this clown after about 1970?

posted 5 years ago by whynotwriteme (7720)
12 replies | jump to latest

He was incredibly difficult. He would show up without knowing his lines or anything about the film and make whimsical, ridiculous changes to everything from dialogue to character names to costuming after eating up the majority of the budget with his salary. Look at films like 'The Missouri Breaks' and 'The Island of Dr. Moreau'. It's obvious he did not care at all about acting and only wanted to deliberately mess up the films he appeared in.

Brando was nothing but a liability. Was his star power really so strong that he was worth all the expense and farcical sabotage he carried out on the films he appeared in?

A director would spend millions on him expecting a powerful performance and the guy would hijack the film and insist on playing the role in drag with a ridiculous accent. Big waste of money.

[–] ecarle (14979) 3 years ago

It's obvious he did not care at all about acting and only wanted to deliberately mess up the films he appeared in.

Brando was nothing but a liability. Was his star power really so strong that he was worth all the expense and farcical sabotage he carried out on the films he appeared in?

A director would spend millions on him expecting a powerful performance and the guy would hijack the film and insist on playing the role in drag with a ridiculous accent. Big waste of money.

--

Well said. All true. So...how'd he get away with it.

I can only do a little guessing:

Though he always got work, in the late 60's Brando wasn't box office and a lot of studio execs hated him.

But a new younger generation was coming in, and some of them worshiped Brando.

One was Francis Coppola.

The casting for Don Vito Corleone had some "usual suspects" in 1971. "Old star" Burt Lancaster was one. "New star" George C. Scott was another. "A level down," Ernest Borgnine campaigned for the role.

But Coppola felt the role should to go only one of two actors: Brando or Olivier.

It was sort of a snob thing, I guess. Those were the two greatest actors, in Coppola's estimation -- Olivier perhaps more on stage, though. Neither was much of a bankable star anymore, but Coppola wanted what he wanted.

And he got one: Brando. And The Godfather was a blockbuster and a Best Picture and Brando won Best Actor(and secured his "activist weirdo" persona by sending Sacheen Littlefeather to refuse it). And suddenly Brando was hot again.

And then he got hotter: Last Tango in Paris. Sex. Nudity(a little of his, a lot of the woman's.) Foreign film cred. Art film cred. Controversy.

And then he went away for awhile.

Brando was reportedly well behaved on The Godfather. He wanted that comeback and he wanted that money. He was OK working on the art film that was Last Tango -- and getting to improvise with angry tales based on his own troubled youth.

CONT

[–] ecarle (14979) 3 years ago

It seems that something "snapped" in Brando after his big Godfather/Last Tango comeback of 72/73. He said later that Tango took a lot out of him emotionally and he just didn't want to have to act that much and that hard anymore.

So...here came the short parts and cameo roles.

With "Missouri Breaks," the prospect of pairing Brando and Nicholson(with Nicholson's eager willingness to act alongside his idol) made the producers offer Brando a lot of money for little work...and no leash on his wild improv. He DID sabotage the production(staying in his trailer over money, dressing weird and using a rather easy to do Irish accent) but..they were stuck with him.

The producers of Superman were pretty much hustlers and beggars. Getting Brando to topline their movie -- if only for the first ten minutes -- was worth it. Brando was a living legend. This would sell Superman as a "prestige movie." He was trouble on Superman (suggesting that Jor-El be played by a "floating bagel"), but on screen he was fine -- saying his lines off cue cards in a Richard Burton British voice.

Next up: Apocalypse Now. With Coppola again, who was getting as nutty as Brando given his wealth and power. Brando's in the first ten minutes of Superman and the last 10 minutes of Apoc Now -- more exciting, you have to wait for him. Brando didn't so much mess with Coppola as he failed him -- overweight, didn't read the book, didn't follow the script.

From then on, it was 20 -plus odd years of being -- at the same time -- a Living Legend and somewhat of a joke in the public eye but, still -- CRAZILY indulged by Hollywood people who simply needed his name. (Recall that Coppola was turned down on Apocalypse Now -- for the Martin Sheen part -- by all the big male stars o the time. Getting Brando was the only way to get ANY name into that movie.)

CONT

[–] ecarle (14979) 3 years ago

The 20-plus years after AN were crazy for Brando. Fellow nutty artists like Johnny Depp loved him and wanted to work with him, so he got movies like that. Producers scrambling for a star, any star, would hire Brando and take the consequences. Sometimes he surprisingly took "long" parts in movies -- Don Juan DeMarco(with Depp), The Freshman(a movie he did because he loved "The In Laws" another comedy by the same maker.)

He took a lot of a parts for the money. He accepted an opening "Exorcist" spoof scene in one of the Scary Movies -- until his friends put up the money to pay him off without doing that(James Woods took the role.)

I think the bottom line is that Marlon Brando rode his "living legend" status to the end of the line and was tolerated because he was either hired by people with no power to stop his antics, and they knew that going in, or befriended by fellow troubled artists.

A very weird career.

[–] mirelurk (884) 2 years ago

Interesting write-up. Thanks!

[–] Truthtalker (1969) 3 years ago

I wonder the same thing

[–] Ripkens25 (2014) 3 years ago

The thing about Brando....even when he was just phoning it in, he still had incredible screen presence. Connery was another such actor.

[–] oatsoy (72) 3 years ago

Connery was nowhere near Brando's caliber.

[–] jacotodd47 (1836) 3 years ago

When he did "The Godfather" in 1972 he was treated like any other actor. He had to screen test. Many people said he was humiliated by the whole process being who he was. But as the OP said - Brando was a pain in the as*& - no one wanted any of his BS. But once he won the Academy Award for "The Godfather" - well that was it, people would put up with his BS again. He drove FF Coppola bananas when they made "Apocalypse Now".

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

True. In the end, he turned in a pretty amazing performance in AN, though. I wonder if Coppola thought it was all worth it.

[–] jacotodd47 (1836) 3 years ago

Probably not. You'd have to consider Coppola never used Brando again. Yeah, if he really wanted Brando, he'd have figured out a way to get him. He had his fill of Brando after AN.

[–] Foster1486 (494) 8 months ago

I always felt he was over-rated

DID some fine work

BUT a lot of miss s
Especially after Apocalypse Now

[–] liscarkat (18373) 8 months ago

One of his most iconic roles, in "The Godfather", was after 1970, and most people seem to think he did a pretty decent job. Apart from that, however, it was mostly just because of his star power as a box office draw. He truly was a massive pain in the ass in his later career.