I can be angry ... grrrr
I can put a smile on my face ... :/
I am a Democrat in Hollywood and I can do anything and become anyone
Oh yea...I give the same performance in every movie
Not quite.
Well, maybe nowadays. You go back to his prime in the 70s-80s - he could do anything.....
Deranged, confused, lonely man - "Taxi Driver"
Fighter suffering from extreme insecurity - "Raging Bull"
Nobody trying to become a star - "The King of Comedy"
Bounty Hunter with some funny lines - "Midnight Run"
Emerging Don - "The Godfather part 2"
I could keep going on this but one thinks the point has been made.
It seems nowadays he does a lot of fluff. He may in fact act the same in every film. One wouldn't know, I don't watch 1/10th of the films he makes now.
But again, in his day, as good as anyone.
Not hardly.
shareI give the same performance in every movie.
Nobody likes me anymore.
I give the same stale performance. My eyes don't move and my cheeks and mouth remain the same.
I'm important. Even when I say fuck Trump it doesn't sound sincere.
And I do it again and again.
The man has done some great stuff, memorable performances mainly in the 70s, 80s and 90s.
It's ridiculous to say he is always the same.
Look at his performance in King of Comedy, very different from a lot of his other roles .
And his part in Heat...cool, ruthless and menacing.
Here's the thing, sure in later years he is not making great movies, he's not stretching himself...but he does not need to. He has nothing to prove. He is not going to put himself through stuff like Raging Bull and gain/lose weight for a role...he's done all that.
The man is close to retiring, anything he does now is just to feather his nest, make money for his family, fund his projects, produce movies.
The man has earned the right to relax.
I wonder if you are trolling or not. Watch Jack Nicholsion if you want an actual actor that gives the same performance in every movie.
shareI wonder if you are trolling or not. Watch Jack Nicholsion if you want an actual actor that gives the same performance in every movie.
---
These things are always a matter of "personal taste," as far as I'm concerned.
For instance, you've got these three "peers" among 'prestige superstars who hit around the same time:
Jack Nicholson(Easy Rider 1969)
Al Pacino (The Godfather 1972)
Robert DeNiro(Godfather II 1974 but REALLY Taxi Driver 1976 as far as I'm concerned. Nobody really KNEW the guy
who won the Oscar for GII.)
Who's the best?
Oscars?:
Nicholson has 3.
DeNiro has 2.
Pacino has 1.
Who's the best actor? I can't tell you.
Who's the smartest actor? Al Pacino. Because he did and does STAGE PLAYS . Learns and remembers his lines, including Shakespeare. Meanwhile DeNiro is famous for forgetting his lines, refusing to learn his lines. For all I know, he has cue cards like Brando did. DeNiro has played a lot of dumb guys and the fear is: he's not acting.
Nicholson never did a stage play to my knowledge so, again -- smartest? Al Pacino.
As far as "actor's charisma" -- movie star charisma like Bogart, Cagney, McQueen had -- I go with Nicholson.
Take a look at "The Last Tycoon" (1976) sometime. DeNiro is the star, in the year of Taxi Driver and looking roughly like he DOES in Taxi Driver -- except in the nice suits of his young movie mogul character.
Eventually a "special guest star" turns up in the movie: Ol' Devil Jack himself. Nicholson. The two actors sit side by side and act together. They do a scene playing ping pong together. And then a drunken DeNiro tries to punch Jack out and Jack knocks HIM out. (Nicholson knocks JAKE LA MOTTA out.)
CONT
But this: sitting side by side we get: Young DeNiro, brooding quiet, unassuming and Young Nicholson, his wide grin a grinning, his pre-girth sexiness on high beam, his famous voice all syrup and style to DeNiro's quietude -- quite frankly, movie star wise, Nicholson rather outshines DeNiro quite easily in his brief time in "The Last Tycoon," and then Nicholson leaves and -- you can feel the hole in the movie.
But that's literally just my opinion because to me, DeNiro/Pacino/Nicholson are EQUAL movie stars and I just like Jack best. (And he's retired now.)
--
I've never quite bought the "actor always gives the same performance" concept. MOVIE STAR actors INDEED "always give the same performance." Bogart was always Bogart. John Wayne was always John Wayne. Steve McQueen was always Steve McQueen. Tom Cruise was always Tom Cruise.
UNLESS...the character was a big change up -- Bogart as a nutzo Navy Captain in The Caine Mutiny or a bum hero in The African Queen. Tom Cruise in a wheel chair and long hair in Born on the Fourth of July.
I'll offer these two male movie stars as "being able to change their performance at will":
Sean Penn:
As surfer dude Jeff Spicoli in Fast Times at Ridgemont High.
As the 1979 permed, balding mob lawyer in Carlito's Way
As the gay city councilman Harvey Milk in Milk.
As the "William Holden-like" movie star in Licorice Pizza.
Daniel Day Lewis
Paraplegic in My Left Foot
A John Huston-voiced oil man in There Will Be Blood
As Abraham f'ing Lincoln (that VOICE! from historical reports).
Otherwise, I don't see DeNiro, Pacino, OR Nicholson playing very different characters in their movies. We paid to see the stars.
lol Nicholsion plays the same type of crazy style in like almost every movie regardless of what type of character portrayal it is.
shareYou can add guys like....
Robert Duvall
Gene Hackman
Dustin Hoffman
You've got 6 all time American greats. Whom is the best? Who knows? I think its up to personal preference. You can analyze it till the end of time, but bottom lining it, individual choices will differ.
SOme personal fave performances.....
Robert De Niro - "Raging Bull"
Dustin Hoffman - "Papillon"
Gene Hackman - "Mississippi Burning"
Jack Nicholson - "About Schmidt"
Al Pacino - "The Godfather Part 2"
Robert Duvall - "The Apostle"
You can add guys like....
Robert Duvall
Gene Hackman
Dustin Hoffman
You've got 6 all time American greats. Whom is the best? Who knows? I think its up to personal preference. You can analyze it till the end of time, but bottom lining it, individual choices will differ.
---
Yep.
Its funny how I -- for one -- seem to have grouped Nicholson, DeNiro and Pacino as the three "prestige greats" of their era. Dustin Hoffman pretty much fits in there too -- he "launched" in 1967 -- BIG! -- with The Graduate and then did it again with Midnight Cowboy in 1969 (the year Nicholson broke through with Easy Rider.)
Gene Hackman is one of my favorites, but in his busy years, he seemed to have purposely "held himself down a notch" from Nicholson/DeNiro/Pacino level -- because he worked in a LOT of movies(like Michael Caine, similarly raised in poverty, Hackman seemed to just want to always work.)
Compared to Hackman, Nicholson was famous for turning a LOT of movies down, sharing quotes like "You should not make movies that aren't important"(advice from his pal John Huston) and "the good ones make one movie a year or less." Also Nicholson never did the Carson show and only showed up on TV at the Oscars(just like Cary Grant before him.)
But you had Gene Hackman making "Prime Cut," "March or Die," "The Domino Principle," "Loose Cannons," "The Package" "Target," "Split Decisions" "Heartbreakers" -- he simply didn't make himself "hard to get for movies" like Nicholson did.
CONT
DeNiro was like Nicholson for AWHILE. During his launch period, DeNiro made sure to be in prestige fare like Godfather II, Taxi Driver, The Deer Hunter and Raging Bull -- indeed ALL of his Scorsese movies.
It was said that most of DeNiro's movies after The Deer Hunter did NOT make money for a long time. Too arty, too serious. He was not considered terribly "bankable"
"The turnaround" came with a series of roles in the late 80's/early 90s: The Untouchables(big hit he was barely in, as Al Capone); Midnight Run(a fairly intelligent buddy movie-thriller, with Charles Grodin as his buddy), GoodFellas(Scorsese again, but this time with a juicy, classic gangster movie; plenty of murders) and..of all things, "Backdraft" the Ron Howard fireman movie with Kurt Russell and William Baldwin in the leads and DeNiro willing to do a small part as an arson investigator. It had begun: DeNiro would do "non-art" movies often.
As for Robert Duvall, truly a great actor of his time, and almost working as often as Hackman but he seemed to lack something that Hackman had, let alone Nicholson: sex appeal. One man's opinion, here --I'm not sure he had a female following and it was rare for Duvall to get a leading man role. In his "young man" years, in bald mode or with a hairpiece, Duvall didn't quite make it, looks wise.
Still, clearly an acting great. I think Tom Hanks named Duvall as America's greatest actor at one point. And in Westerns like Lonesome Dove and Open Range, Duvall projected his own KIND of sex appeal...sometimes. Tender Mercies, too. Like a lot of men, he got sexier as he got older.
CONT
Robert De Niro - "Raging Bull"
I'll add: "Jackie Brown"
Dustin Hoffman - "Papillon"
"Tootsie"
Gene Hackman - "Mississippi Burning"
"The Royal Tennenbaums"
Jack Nicholson - "About Schmidt"
"Chinatown"
Al Pacino - "The Godfather Part 2"
"Carlito's Way"
Robert Duvall - "The Apostle"
"Open Range"
True, Hackman made a lot of fluff.
However, no matter what he was in, no matter how bad the movie - he is always good.
One always considered him to be an extremely consistent actor.
De Niro does that now, too - he's in a ton of fluff. I don't know how good he is today because one rarely watches his current movies.
Yeah, Nicholson had it right. DiCaprio is following his blueprint.
True, Hackman made a lot of fluff.
However, no matter what he was in, no matter how bad the movie - he is always good.
---
I totally agree. Truth is -- as somebody somewhere once said -- pretty much ALL movie stars are interesting actors. Otherwise, they wouldn't be stars.
Gene Hackman and Michael Caine were both actors who ended up with Oscars -- two for Hackman, two for Caine(but only Hackman got a Best Actor one and how odd for Caine -- a leading man star for DECADES and he only copped two SUPPORTING Oscars?)
So they were both good actors. But both seemed to have some sort of worry about "never getting a job again" and kept saying YES to all sorts of things. Like Michael Caine and the horrible Jaws IV, of which he said, "I made that movie for the Bahamas location and to get money to buy a house. I hear the movie was horrible. I never saw it. However, I have seen the house, and its quite nice.)
I recall reading an article in the 70's about Charles Bronson's hard won and late-age stardom. His agent said "he actually makes as much a year as Robert Redford -- except Bronson has to make four movies to earn what Redford earns on one."
I might add that even as I selected "Pacino, DeNiro, Nicholson" as great stars -- I picked those three because of their "prestige" credentials. None of those three ever REALLY took "any old parts" like Hackman and Caine sometimes did -- though DeNiro started to. Indeed -- DeNiro STARTED in prestige work -- Godfather II, Bertolucci's 1900, The Deer Hunter, The Mission -- and then sort of "slipped into" more bankable stuff(The Untouchables, Midnight Run, Backdraft...Rocky and Bullwinkle! Fockers...) and never looked back.
CONT
Burt Reynolds was a big star in the 70's -- with one "prestige" movie on his resume -- Deliverance -- but mainly an entertainment guy. He gave many an interview expressing anger at directors who would "always" pick Nicholson, DeNiro, Pacino over him -- he was a bit paranoid, but perhaps justifiably so. Reynolds cited "Cuckoo's Nest" as a role he COULD have played rather than Nicholson (and Nicholson won the Oscar for it). And he SWORE that the role Nicholson took in "Terms of Endearment" (which won Jack another Oscar) was written for him but he turned it down(seems true enough: Reynolds had worked with writer-director James Brooks on "Starting Over" right before Brooks did Terms.)
Indeed, while Nicholson, DeNiro and Pacino were being highbrow in the 70's, Reynolds and Eastwood(in that version) and Bronson and even Redford were old time movie stars. Moreover, Redford, Beatty and Ryan O'Neal were "pretty boy movie" stars who nonetheless made prestige movies. There's no way to pigeonhole ANY of those stars except -- they all became stars.
CONT
De Niro does that now, too - he's in a ton of fluff. I don't know how good he is today because one rarely watches his current movies.
---
Well, as somebody up top said...DeNiro made all the serious work he needed to, and won two Oscars. He can afford to cruise now in his 80's.
And hey: I liked his "Dirty Grandpa" role for one specific reason: we've got all these OTHER old guy action heroes (Liam Neeson, Harrison Ford, Sly Stallone) shooting and punching people....DeNiro in "Dirty Grandpa" made the case for an old guy SEX STAR. The movie begins with DeNiro mourning the death of his long time wife, but confessing to his grandson(Zac Efron) that "I was totally faithful to your grandmother, I have not had sex in years and now -- I want to BLANK,BLANK, BLANK.) So old men everywhere could fantasize about sex to go with the shooting. (Viagra?) Also, DeNiro played the part with gusto. And Aubrey Plaza played the young sex-crazed woman who "digs older men."
--
Yeah, Nicholson had it right. DiCaprio is following his blueprint.
--
Whether one thinks Nicholson always plays the same part or is over the top, he turns out to have tried as best he could to follow John Huston's advice -- "don't make unimportant movies." He turned down all sorts of blockbusters until the Joker in Batman came along and then he "cashed in."
DiCaprio IS folllowing his blueprint, with a "dash of DeNiro": using Martin Scorsese as his patron saint employer as often as possible.
PS. One other great who turned down a LOT of famous roles was Paul Newman.
I loved reading once that Sidney Lumet and screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky first offered the script of Network to Paul Newman with the note: "You can play any part you want."
So Newman could have played:
William Holden's part(aging stud TV exec.)
Peter Finch's part(madman of the airwaves newscaster)
Robert Duvall's part (corporate villain)
Ned Beatty's part (one great solo Oscar-bait scene.)
But Newman said no to all of them.
I pretty much agree with everything you have said. Reynolds in fact did turn down a lot of great roles. WHich is too bad for him. As an actor, he definitely proved himself in "Boogie Nights". It's too bad he was up against Robin Williams that year, because if not, he'd have won the Oscar.
Warren Beatty turned down many a great role. So did MIckey Rourke.
I don't know if you can make the same comment about Paul Newman. You've indicated he turned down "Network". Fine, but what else? Has he turned down other films he should have done?
I pretty much agree with everything you have said. Reynolds in fact did turn down a lot of great roles. WHich is too bad for him.
---
It seems that the biggest mistake -- his most likely shot at an Oscar win - - was what became the Jack Nicholson role in Terms of Endearment. Because James Brooks wrote the role FOR Reynolds -- with Reynolds in mind. This crucial male character in a story very much about WOMEN (a mother and grown daughter) wasn't even IN the source novel. Once the script reached Nicholson, he said, he knew two things (1) it was going to be a great movie, a hit, maybe something more and (2) he would have no problem playing a "supporting role." (He had made the same choice and nabbed an Oscar nom in Beatty's Reds two years before.)
I'm not so sure that Reynolds had "first shot" at Cuckoo's Nest, though. I think the filmmakers zeroed in on Nicholson early on.
--
As an actor, Reynolds definitely proved himself in "Boogie Nights".
---
A role he almost turned down and actually hated -- he fired his agent over it. Even with his sole Oscar nom, he said "I didn't like playing a man who didn't respect women." He was pretty daring in that part, with some of the things he had to say and do.
--
It's too bad he was up against Robin Williams that year, because if not, he'd have won the Oscar.
--
Yep. I may have read too much into it, but it seemed from footage at the Oscar ceremony that Reynolds REALLY seethed a bit over having to lose the the rather "on" and elfin Williams. It was like a Macho Man having to lose to a mime(and yes, Williams WAS good in a "good guy" role, but still.)
CONT
Reynolds always took comfort in noting that he was the Number One Box office star for five years. But then, so was Mickey Rooney, give or take a year. Nicholson (not mentioning Reynolds) around the time made the point, "I'm usually around Number Three, which gives me all the power I need." Another way of saying: sometimes Number One doesn't make the best movies.
Warren Beatty turned down many a great role.
---
Tons of them! For instance, he turned down the porn director role that went to Reynolds in Boogie Nights!
And he worked for awhile with QT on playing Bill in Kill Bill. When QT kept saying "its a David Carradine type of character," Beatty said: "Hey, why don't you cast DAVID CARRADINE?" Done.
Beatty was courted a long time to play the James Caan role in Misery. Its screenwriter, William Goldman, joked several years AFTER the movie came out: "Beatty is still deciding. He is still considering the part."
Beatty did suggest that the man NOT get his foot chopped off as in the novel saying "I'd be playing a loser." He recommended the "hobbling" that we get instead.
By the way, Goldman said that pretty much EVERY male actor in Hollywood turned down that "Misery" part. Something about having to be injured, in a bed, submissive to the psycho woman.
Beatty said no.
Redford said no.
Ford said no.
Michael Douglas said no.
William Hurt said no.
Richard Dreyfuss who having turned down When Harry Met Sally told Rob Reiner "I'll say yes to your next offer" -- said no.
That's why James Caan - then struggling with his career and trying to prove himself drug-free -- got the part.
CONT
CONT
More on Beatty:
According to former Paramount exec and insider Peter Bart, Beatty always felt a competition with fellow "smart pretty guy" Robert Redford, and loved to tell people that HE (Beatty) turned down these roles that Redford took:
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid(Beatty was a MUCH bigger star than Redford at the time.)
The Way We Were.
The Great Gatsby.
I don't know about The Sting, but Beatty claimed those above were offered to him first.
CONT
Warren Beatty turned down many a great role. So did MIckey Rourke.
---
Interesting. Beatty did most of his "turning down" when he was a MAJOR star. Rourke seems to have killed off his career as a star before it was really going. (And then i remember LOVING him in character roles like the shady lawyer in played in The Rainmaker.)
CONT
I don't know if you can make the same comment about Paul Newman. You've indicated he turned down "Network". Fine, but what else? Has he turned down other films he should have done?
--
Oh, he turned down a LOT of roles...though not always films he should have done.
I'm away from my bookcase but in a Newman biography there was a page with all the movies he turned down and it was pretty shocking how MAJOR the roles were -- even in the 70's and 80's as his star started to dim with age(he remained a GREAT star to the end, but had to cede leading man roles eventually.)
Here are some odd ones he turned down:
The Omar Sharif part in Funny Girl (Newman wrote a funny letter to the producers about his limited song and dance abilities.)
The Tony Curtis hero role in The Great Race.
The Steve McQueen role in The Sand Pebbles(for which McQueen got his only Oscar nom.) Newman turned it down to work with Hitchcock on Torn Curtain --not one of the great Hitchcock films -- and always regretted that.
And this rather famous oddity:
Paul Newman turned down Dirty Harry -- too conservative for him -- but recommended Clint Eastwood for the role. Eastwood got it.
That said, before Newman got HIS offer, Dirty Harry was set as a Frank Sinatra vehicle -- near the end of Sinatra's movie star career. He quit over an old hand injury.
And evidently, during this time, the Dirty Harry script (said their agents and relatives) was also sent to Robert Mitchum and Steve McQueen(too close to Bullitt, he said) and Walter Matthau(!) and Bill Cosby(!) and John Wayne (who made McQ as an homage.)
Which raises an issue: Hollywood lore being what it is, we can never be sure who REALLY turned down a role rather than didn't GET it. John Wayne may have gotten a copy of the Dirty Harry script, but i don't think he was ever actually offered the role.
Meanwhile, while working on The MacIntosh Man for director John Huston, Newman was pitched "The Man Who Would Be King" as a Newman/Redford picture. Said Newman to Huston: "No...the two buddies have to be British! Use Connery and Caine!" And that's what Huston did.
CONT
I've read enough books on Hollywood to understand that often ONE script was sent to MANY stars in an effort to "fish around til you catch one." BECAUSE: many stars are usually working at any given time(let's use male stars here) and even if they like a role, they can't play it if they are booked SOMEWHERE ELSE. So everybody gets a script and a game commences: (1) Who is available? (2) Can we get them? (3) Which of those do we WANT?
This being a Robert DeNiro page, I will note that he was courted heavily to play Al Capone in The Untouchables(he was a friend of its director, Brian DePalma) but kept dithering so long that they gave the part to Bob Hoskins instead. And THEN DeNiro said yes. They cast DeNiro and paid off Hoskins , who said, "Any time in the future you want to pay my full fee NOT to make a movie...I'm available!" The Untouchables was actually very helpful to DeNiro...a big hit action movie that allowed him to do a LITTLE of his method Raging Bull weight gain to maintain his art rep.
Interesting: DeNiro...and then DiCaprio...seemed to use Martin Scorsese as their "quality control director" -- generally getting good movies to make with that guy. In turn, Scorsese got studio greenlights because he "could always get a star" -- DeNiro and then Leo. (And then both in Killers of the Flower Moon.)
I think this is funny: given DeNiro's reputation for not knowing his lines(documented on The Untouchables when he was young AND on Joker a few years ago) he must have loved doing Scorsese's Casino. So much of that movie is NARRATION. DeNiro didn't have to memorize anything - he just read off a printed page. (And yes, he had some lines, too...but...)
"I think this is funny: given DeNiro's reputation for not knowing his lines(documented on The Untouchables when he was young AND on Joker a few years ago) he must have loved doing Scorsese's Casino. So much of that movie is NARRATION. DeNiro didn't have to memorize anything - he just read off a printed page. (And yes, he had some lines, too...but...)"
First thing you've said I'm not so sure on. Everything I've read about De Niro indicates he shows up totally prepared to work. Plus, he doesn't like it when others can't match his commitment. Everyone I know of that worked with De Niro said they had to be on top of their game while working with him.
"I think this is funny: given DeNiro's reputation for not knowing his lines(documented on The Untouchables when he was young AND on Joker a few years ago) he must have loved doing Scorsese's Casino. So much of that movie is NARRATION. DeNiro didn't have to memorize anything - he just read off a printed page. (And yes, he had some lines, too...but...)"
---
First thing you've said I'm not so sure on. Everything I've read about De Niro indicates he shows up totally prepared to work. Plus, he doesn't like it when others can't match his commitment. Everyone I know of that worked with De Niro said they had to be on top of their game while working with him
---
Well, I'm ready to back pedal ALL THE WAY on that one, with this caveat:
I based my remarks on only TWO examples:
Brian DePalma said that on The Untouchables, his old pal DeNiro didn't learn his lines, and it was evidently a problem. DePalma had to work with DeNiro on the lines, he said. But who knows?
RECENTLY, an actor-podcast-comedian guy named Marc Maron ratted DeNiro out for blowing lines and forgetting lines in their scenes in "Joker." Maybe Maron will back pedal. Also, a then-70 something man (DeNiro) may WELL have had trouble remembering his lines. I'm surprised that the old actors don't ALL use cue cards and earpieces with lines read to them.
But if the rest of the time, if DeNiro was serious and "deep into his work"(Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, The Deer Hunter) I'll BET he was prepared.
Some method guys and gals don't follow the lines anyway. They read the lines once to themselves and then "say it their own way."
Right, I doubt the De Palma business.
However, I can understand De Niro having trouble on "Joker". He'd have been 75 or 76 during production. If he forgot lines I'd bet it wasn't because he was ill prepared, it was because he simply forgot them. This is what happens when you get old.
Right, I doubt the De Palma business.
--
Fair enough. I read it somewhere -- a DePalma quote -- and wondered if it was true.
I'm of two minds about DeNiro. On the one hand, he seems to project a certain "dumbness" off screen. But even if he is dumb, he has a net worth of 500 million or so(I read somewhere) ..a LOT more than Al Pacino(who in his new autobio claims he went broke as a superstar several times and had to do some lousy movies to earn back.) So he isn't THAT dumb.
A "mean take" on many(most?) film stars is that most barely finished high school (J-Law dropped out at 14 or something), few have college (usually a year or so), fewer still have masters.
To which they say: "So what? I'm famous and worth 500 million dollars." They took their street smarts and went all the way. Whlist the rest of us with "education" struggle along at whatever "normal" earning levels we can reach.
---
CONT
However, I can understand De Niro having trouble on "Joker". He'd have been 75 or 76 during production. If he forgot lines I'd bet it wasn't because he was ill prepared, it was because he simply forgot them. This is what happens when you get old.
--
Sure. That one is much easier to "see" than something happening back on The Untouchables. Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with letting older actors use "Brando cue cards" or earpieces.
I have seen the risk at moviechat and other venues of "criticizing favorite stars." It is a given that stars have FANS (either emotional fans or fans who "respect the art") and I've found that the respect level is high.
Nonetheless: DeNiro has played some roles I didn't much like -- he is abusive of women in New York, New York, Raging Bull, Once Upon a Time in America(he put some real animal rage and lust into a rape scene -- and the victim is a "nice girl"), and even Casino(asked to improvise an argument with Sharon Stone, he REALLY cusses her out). In short...I've always been a little worried about this guy's psyche. (I hear he is mean in A Boy's Life too.) To which he would say: "I'm just an actor and those are characters I play." But I didn't much ENJOY watching him play those characters, and he CHOSE those roles.
CONT
Great actors yes, not all that bright otherwise.
Case in point, both popped out new babies in their 80s.
"To which they say: "So what? I'm famous and worth 500 million dollars." They took their street smarts and went all the way. Whlist the rest of us with "education" struggle along at whatever "normal" earning levels we can reach."
For every AL Pacino and Robert De Niro, there are 100,000 that tried their best and failed. This is why they get the $ they do.
For every AL Pacino and Robert De Niro, there are 100,000 that tried their best and failed. This is why they get the $ they do.
--
That's true, too. And another reason indeed for the high pay.
There was a funny scene on that streaming series "The Kominsky Method" with Michael Douglas as a has been star teaching an acting class. He reads his eager students(some of them clearly NOT talented) the statistics on how many acting students or SAG members do NOT earn a living or get known -- he's very earnest ("Don't consider an acting career...most of you will never make it.") They listen earnestly and just start peppering him with questions about how to get an agent, etc. EACH of them believes that that THEY are "the one who will make it."
Also on the high pay: some ACTRESS, as I recall said: "I don't get paid millions for the acting. I get paid millions for giving up my private life and for all the other shit."
"They listen earnestly and just start peppering him with questions about how to get an agent, etc. EACH of them believes that that THEY are "the one who will make it."
Of course, you'd have to think that way to even bother trying. I don't know the stats, but if one had to guess, maybe 1in 1000 gets some work. Maybe 1 in 5000 ekes out a living. Probably 1 in 100000 becomes a bona fide star. And the greats, one in a million.
"Also on the high pay: some ACTRESS, as I recall said: "I don't get paid millions for the acting. I get paid millions for giving up my private life and for all the other shit."
You get paid millions if people insist on watching you. It could be TV (ratings) or film (big box office #'s). ANd it doesn't last. We can go back to Burt Reynolds, when he went SOuth in the mid 80s, he talked of all of his so called "friends". I quote him: "They left in droves".
"Which raises an issue: Hollywood lore being what it is, we can never be sure who REALLY turned down a role rather than didn't GET it. John Wayne may have gotten a copy of the Dirty Harry script, but i don't think he was ever actually offered the role. "
Who knows for sure....ultimately I believe Newman had the right idea for the role - Clint Eastwood. I can't see anyhone else as Dirty Harry.
Ok, so Newman turned down a few. Eehh, no biggie, he made plenty of good choices as well. I'm a big fan of his, not just the acting, the guy was a real humanitarian. A sincerely good, generous man.
Ok, so Newman turned down a few
---
And more than those. The ones I cited were just from memory. To be a "completist," I will soon access the biography that listed a lot MORE.
One thing to remember about Paul Newman. He actually became a (young) star in 1956, as a boxer in "Somebody Up There Likes Me" (with young Steve McQueen way down the cast list as a member of the boxer's NYC gang.)
So Newman was actually a star WAY before Hoffman and Nicholson and DeNiro and Pacino(older too, duh.) . And since so many "Golden Era" stars in the 60s were dying (Cooper, Gable, Tracy) or retiring(Grant, Cagney)...Newman was in HOT demand for pretty much everything. Particularly as an American star(there were a lot of British stars.) McQueen was his only real competition. And that took time.
So Newman HAD to turn down a lot of things, across his entire career.
---
Eehh, no biggie, he made plenty of good choices as well. I'm a big fan of his, not just the acting, the guy was a real humanitarian. A sincerely good, generous man.
---
All true. As "star longevity goes," he was one of the longest-lived:
50s
60s
70s
80s(a "re-birth" in older man parts)
90s
00s (a little bit.)
I will pick this post to say: I appreciate you trying to respond to all my remarks. I'm famous for responding to others and to writing my own little mini-essays, so it is nice to get responded to. But I know it can be exhausting and perhaps irritating. So "pick and choose 'em."
Ok, so Newman turned down a few
---
And more than those. The ones I cited were just from memory. To be a "completist," I will soon access the biography that listed a lot MORE.
--
OK. I found the book "Paul Newman: A Life," and on pp 274-275, we get these turn downs and the actors who took the roles:
Dirty Harry(Eastwood)
The Eiger Sanction (Eastwood)
Robin and Marian (Connery)
Bobby Deerfield (Pacino) (a race car driver movie)
Superman (Marlon Brando)
Romancing the Stone(Michael Douglas)
Ragtime (James Cagney)
Paper Moon(Ryan O'Neal -- Newman almost did it with HIS daughter as O'Neal did with HIS...and HIS won an Oscar for it.)
All That Jazz(Roy Scheider)
...and a number of movies that weren't even made.
A thought as to why Newman turned down Network , even though he was offered "any male role." He likely saw that the movie had great roles for SEVERAL actors and thus...some competition. If he took the William Holden role, he'd contend with Peter Finch. If he took the Finch role, he'd contend with Holden. Even Ned Beatty's one-scene barnburner distracted from the lead. (Duvall took the villain role, Newman wouldn't have taken that., though I guess he played a couple of villains later on.)
Mickey Rourke. He's like self destructive.
A lot of big roles came his way in the 1980s that he turned down.
He ended up destroying himself in Hollywood. Makes a nice comeback with "The Wrestler" - then, I believe he messed that up as well.
He has mental problems.
Mickey Rourke. He's like self destructive.
--
Evidently so. And he allowed his plastic surgery to so take over his face that it became "in-human," mask-like.
I'll put in raves for Rourke in these "pre-comeback roles":
1997: John Grisham's The Rainmaker. Francis Coppola took this "for hire" job and turned in a nice traditional legal melodrama, with a "many star" (if not quite all-star cast: Matt Damon as the young lead; Danny DeVito as his legal sidekick, Teresa Wright(teenage Young Charlie in Alfred Hitchcock's 1943 Shadow of a Doubt...here a very old woman in 1997.) Jon Voight as the "villain lawyer."
And Mickey Rourke..in only about three scenes -- two at the beginning and surprise one near the end(when's he on the run "somewhere in the tropics") as a shady ambulance chaser lawyer(who also owns a strip club) who turns out to really KNOW his legal precedent cases. Rourke's charimsa in that film stole the movie from EVERYBODY -- you could see how he COULD have been a star.
Get Carter remake(2000). This was a toothless PG version(was it rated R? doesn't matter) of Michael Caine's 1971 British gangster classic(a HARD R of its era.) Sly Stallone took the Caine part, Caine took a small part -- and Rourke showed his chops as a hip, cool ex-boxer who banters with Sly and ALMOST bests him in a real hard fight. Again: too cool for the movie almost steals it -- though Sly IS the lead.
Sin City(2005) Rourke got past his plastic surgery issues by wearing an animated CGI face that looked, wrote one critic "like a cross between Kirk Douglas and a tank." Again, EASILY stole the movie from everybody (in his one segment of three) as a guy named Marv -- out to kill everybody who killed a beautiful woman who gave him "one night of love" before being killed.
Those films laid the groundwork for "The Wrestler"(originally a Nicolas Cage project -- see how luck runs?" and...a slow decline (though Rourke got Iron Man II and The Expendables 1 out of the comeback.)
Mickey Rourke is a solid actor. The problem is he is messed up in the head.
I read he saw a shrink for decades. I guess it didn't do all that much good. I saw him in a recent interview in which he was tearing Tom Cruise up ("plays the same part in every movie").
He looks ....imbalanced. Like he'll blow at any second. SOmething is seriously wrong with the guy. It's why, no matter what he does that's good - he ends up screwing it up.
He looks ....imbalanced. Like he'll blow at any second. SOmething is seriously wrong with the guy. It's why, no matter what he does that's good - he ends up screwing it up.
--
Well, that surely happens. And WE don't get to have to DEAL with that kind of an actor "on set." And yet, he survives. I hope he doesn't hurt himself or anybody else.
Somewhat related, Al Pacino was asked why his "Scarface" co-star Steven Bauer didn't make it(though since then, he HAS -- Breaking Bad.) But then Pacino earnestly answered "some of us just can't handle the pressure of success."
Ok, that's about enough exercising for today. Let me answer this then I'm going to cut out.
"Well, that surely happens. And WE don't get to have to DEAL with that kind of an actor "on set." And yet, he survives. I hope he doesn't hurt himself or anybody else. "
Who knows with Mickey Rourke, for lack of a better description, he's fu*&^%ed up.
"Somewhat related, Al Pacino was asked why his "Scarface" co-star Steven Bauer didn't make it(though since then, he HAS -- Breaking Bad.) But then Pacino earnestly answered "some of us just can't handle the pressure of success."
Ok, with Bauer, he had the goods, which he proved in "Scarface". I believe, but don't quote me, he went off the deep end with drugs. Is he working now? Last thing I recall him in was "Traffic" - which he was very good in. He's got the goods, but even if he cleans his act up (or maybe he did, I really don't know) - you still need to get that big role. Like Downey did with "Iron Man".
Ok brother, nice chatting with you.
Till next time....
Yep, correct again.
James Caan was last on the list. Turned out to be a huge win for him because it resurrected his career.
Beatty also had a knack for trying to take over productions. He was a bit full of himself. An example is "Nixon". He was all set to play RIchard Nixon until Oliver Stone got rid of him.
For all of Beatty's forceful arrogance only one suggestion of his stuck - Joan Allen as Pat.
Yep, correct again.
James Caan was last on the list. Turned out to be a huge win for him because it resurrected his career.
---
As I've mentioned before around Moviechat, one thing I try to do is to share what I've read in books -- gossip really - - and then see to what extent it checks out.
William Goldman was a screenwriter who won two Oscars (Butch Cassidy; All the President's Men) and sold a lot of other scripts -- not all of them(especially near the end) all that good everytime.
Still, he had "credentials" and he was willing, across the course of a few books, to "tell story after story" about the major stars he worked with and for. He really attacked Dustin Hoffman over Marathon Man, praised Paul Newman in general (the most normal movie star he worked with, he said) and shared stories about the Misery male casting and Eastwood(another star he respected). I tended to BELIEVE Goldman's stories but...again...who knows? I certainly LIKED Goldman's stories -- they felt "inside."
Peter Bart, the now-90-something writer who once helped Bob Evans run Paramount, had his OWN stories to tall, more guarded. He claimed over a lunch with Beatty that he questioned high star salaries when they were "advocating for pay equality, etc." He said Beatty said NO...the star system is very important to Hollywood. I suppose his point was that only if you pay them those gigantic salaries do they BECOME and STAY stars...driving business and providing jobs in the industry. Jack Nicholson said, "without me there's no movie," and said HE got lots of people paid in Hollywood everytime he said yes to a project.
I just find movie stars to be interesting people -- we "get to know them like friends" (which they are not, but fans sure prove they FEEL like friends) and in some cases, fans CHEER when these folks score their 50 million dollar paydays(and up.) Its a human nature thing.
CONT
Also important: how movie stars BECOME stars. Said William Goldman: "Most stars become stars because an established star said no to a part."
Example: Robert Redford became a star thanks to Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Paul Newman was always aboard(and wanted to play Sundance, not Butch) but these stars said no to whichever the other part was: Steve McQueen, Warren Beatty, Marlon Brando(actually I think he was eliminated.)
By the way, he didn't replace anybody, but Walter Matthau said The Odd Couple made him a star(he was repeating his Broadway role.) A Best Supporting Oscar for The Fortune Cookie(where he played a lead) established him as castable for The Odd Couple(over Gleason and Sinatra) and he was on his way.
DeNiro? Bang the Drum Slowly and Mean Streets established him in 1973; Godfather II got him an Oscar(for a Young Brando imitation) in 1974..but I think Taxi Driver in 1976 put him over the top. We got to KNOW him, his face, his voice, his mannerisms.
Hey if you can get 50 mil, good for you.
You're worth whatever it is someone is willing to pay you.
And indeed, if you prove to be box office gold in Hollywood, if you've got any brains, you should cash in.
Hence Jim Carrey - after the successful trifecta of "Ace Ventura", "The Mask" and "Dumb and Dumber" - he grabbed 20 mil for his next film - "The Cable Guy".
Hey if you can get 50 mil, good for you.
---
That's right. I recall Bill Cosby on the Larry King TV show(back when Cosby was cool) offering his take on massive movie star(or in his case TV star) pay. He said:
"If you don't like that or think its fair...try to JOIN us. Try to reach the levels we do. I had many years in stand up, records and TV before I truly made it. See if YOU can do that."
He was certainly right in one way -- you had to EARN your way to the top where audiences want to pay to see you, and yet:
I personally find that a lot of these modern-day "Marvel movie" young actors end up with giant paydays JUST FOR GETTING THE ROLES. They aren't really stars, its just that the movies make billions...so they make MILLIONS. That's not quite like working your way up the way Bill Cosby did. Still..we would all take the pay without complaint, yes?
You're worth whatever it is someone is willing to pay you.
---
Definitely in a Marvel movie! But also (with talent), Taylor Swift filling arenas. And her boyfriend winning football games(millions of lads play football in America, very few make it to the NFL and thrive there.)
---
And indeed, if you prove to be box office gold in Hollywood, if you've got any brains, you should cash in.
---
Yes, and it is so INSANELY big pay these days. I've read of Burt Reynolds(in a lower paying time,) Nicholas Cage and Al Pacino "going broke" and I'm like: HOW? How do you do that given that PAY?
Conversely: Bill Murray walked away from movies for about half of the 80s because he knew he'd already earned enough to live on for the rest of his life. But he came back anyway.
---
CONT
Hence Jim Carrey - after the successful trifecta of "Ace Ventura", "The Mask" and "Dumb and Dumber" - he grabbed 20 mil for his next film - "The Cable Guy".
Yep -- and a trifecta announces stardom as a PROVEN star...three times in a row.
I recall before The Cable Guy they pulled Robin Williams(tentatively) from The Riddler in Batman Forever and put Carrey in. As some critic wrote: "This has gone from being the next Batman movie to being the next Jim Carrey vehicle." (Williams also got pulled from the Joker when Nicholson said yes -- there is argument as to whether or not Williams actually got those roles OFFERED -- but he was certainly mentioned for both The Joker and The Riddler when casting was underway for both movies.)
Something else about movie star pay:
I recall some finance guy once disparaging Hollywood million dollar pay as "childish." Idea being that a directory of salaries in , say, a federal government pay booklet might have LEVELS of exactitude like "$103,424. 24" but Hollywood folks just "started with a million per movie, upped it to five million, then ten million" -- Monopoly money, paychecks as imaginative (and competitive) as the movies themselves.
When "TV actor" Bruce Willis got a $5 million payday for Die Hard, all the ESTABLISHED movie stars started asking for more...
It doesn't matter if you are some chump Marvel actor, a great actor, a mediocre actor, or a terrific singer.
You are worth whatever someone will pay you. It's like baseball players. Some of them making 25 mil a year - a lot of people resent it.
Hey, only 750 people on the planet can do what they do, this is why they get that kind of $.
Or, Cosby ( before his mess) Nicholson, Swift, etc - there is only one person on the planet that can do what they can do - themselves. Hence they get huge sums of $.
Those that resent it are probably just jealous.
It doesn't matter if you are some chump Marvel actor, a great actor, a mediocre actor, or a terrific singer.
You are worth whatever someone will pay you.
---
Yep. Though the "chump" (your word, not mine, ha) Marvel actors always seem a bit like lottery winners to me. Except Robert Downey Jr. He fought his way back from addiction and even imprisonment to launch the Marvel era with Iron Man AND he's a good actor who coulda shoulda been a star anyway. (I think he's getting a structured $100 million payday to come back to Marvel in a new role.)
---
It's like baseball players. Some of them making 25 mil a year - a lot of people resent it.
--
All athletes I think deserve what they get -- they are usually the best players in a nation(and a world -- Japanese baseball players? ) where MILLIONS play these sports.
Football players take tremendous hits.
--
Those that resent it are probably just jealous.
--
Not me. I know I can't play sports at their level(never could). I know I cant play a musical instrument(rules me out of bands.) These leaves acting - which those South Park guys say is the EASIEST job in entertainment, requires no musical or athletic talent at all -- but you'd better be good looking and in terrific shape to even try for that profession "in general" and a great actor in particular if you don't have the looks. I'm out.
So no, its just a matter of watching these folks perform for us. No jealousy.
And Cosby was right about one thing: you CAN make that kind of money too -- if you have talent and the ambition to compete.
Well, as it happens, I'm home working out right now - so, I figure Ill respond as I do my thing....
True about Downey Jr. but he got lucky. Nothing was happening for him until "Iron Man" because he was virtually uninsurable. Most wanted nothing to do with him. If "Iron Man" tanked, he'd be history. But hey good for him, he got lucky - made the best of it.
" These leaves acting - which those South Park guys say is the EASIEST job in entertainment, requires no musical or athletic talent at all -- but you'd better be good looking and in terrific shape to even try for that profession "in general" and a great actor in particular if you don't have the looks. I'm out."
A lot of it is luck. I lived out in Hollywood for 6 months. Saw a lot of working actors that didn't impress me one bit. One in particular, I met and talked to, didn't even know he was a star. You have to be in the right place, at the right time, with the right script, and the right role. Now of course, the one in a million greats I've spoken of, talent carried them.
Yeah, that's right.
Reynolds bi&^%$ched and moaned the entire time he made "Boogie Nights". Turned out to be some of the best acting he's ever done.
I'm sure Reynolds didn't like losing. It doesn't bother me though, a well deserved win for Robin Williams.
Though Burt Reynolds was very funny on the Carson Show(where the usually tough and humorless TV cop star suddenly showed a sense of humor), he proved to be quite the neurotic fellow. Both his Playboy interview and one of his autobios REALLY allowed him to spew some anger. He felt he should have be nominated for the Oscar for "Semi Tough." OK, he's actually Cary Grant in that one. He felt that a "cut scene" and his Cosmo centerold cost him one for Deliverance.
But he was just always angry about "those other guys" getting the prestige parts. And then he rather sank his career with too many BAD and silly comedies with Dom DeLuise; audiences started to find his choices to be a waste of their tickets and time.
But Hollywood likes a comeback and..Burt came back.
I've always been a little sad that he was CAST in QT's "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," attended a table read -- and died of a heart attack before he could play the short role(George Spahnn at the Spahnn ranch -- Bruce Dern took the role.) What a role that would have been to go out on.
Yeah, that's right, Reynolds was set to do "OATIH" - but unfortunately passed.
He grabbed on big time in the 70s because he was funny and charming. A couple of good ole boy movies, then "Hooper" - he ended up on top.
He went down the tubes in the 1980s but lets give him a break - he was a hopeless drug addict at that point.
He did end up cleaning himself up, but , as we said previously, he almost blew it with "Boogie Nights". He didn't want to do it, and he was impossible on the set while he did make it. However, IMO - its some of the best actual acting he ever did.
Yeah, that's right, Reynolds was set to do "OATIH" - but unfortunately passed.
---
Its just one of those "sad career stories" in Hollywood. He could have gone out with one really great scene(Dern did well in it) in a big hit and a "new classic."
---
He grabbed on big time in the 70s because he was funny and charming.
---
That's right. I remember that he was still ON TV in a Quinn Martin series called "Dan August" when he got the part in Deliverance. It seemed weird at the time: "A TV guy in a major movie?" Dan August got cancelled just in time for Reynolds to make his big career move "up." He proved his comedy chops on Carson, got a major(and very sexually controversial) movie in Deliverance(it got Oscar noms), and did that Cosmo nude layout(with a hand covering the main attraction) and despite Burt complaining about it hurting his serious career, I REMEMBER what all the moms AND daughters in the neighborhood had to say about that fold out. Translated: "YUM!"
Reynolds then took Cary Grant's advice to "make a lot of movies so people get to know you" -- and though some weren't so good, he had The Longest Yard(1974) and Smokey and the Bandit (1977) as BIG hits and he was so launched that he tried to take "cerebral NYC neurotic parts" to counterbalance the good ol' boy stuff. Starting Over. Paternity.
--
CONT
He went down the tubes in the 1980s but lets give him a break - he was a hopeless drug addict at that point.
---
With a big reason why: when he FINALLY got to make a movie with Clint Eastwood(City Heat 1984) he got hit in the jaw with a REAL chair during a fight scene and this gave him a crippling jaw condition that led to painkillers, weight loss, the works. City Heat isn't that good, and it is suspected that one reason why is that it required re-shoots and cut scenes ("Reynolds" does an entire fight scene with a holiday wolf mask on -- likely a stuntman in for him.)
But also in the 80's, he did those silly movies in which the "blooper outtakes" at the end(with , yes, Dom DeLuise) weren't much worse than the REAL scenes. Smokey and the Bandit II, Cannonball Run 1(OK0, Cannonball Run 2(awful) Stroker Ace. Fans just walked away.
---
He did end up cleaning himself up,
---
And jumped back to TV rather quicky. First with a detective show that flopped, but second with a sitcom that HIT(Evening Shade). I always found it poignant that he surrounded himself with old friends on the show -- Charles Durning, Ossie Davis, Hal Holbrook.
CONT
---but , as we said previously, he almost blew it with "Boogie Nights". He didn't want to do it, and he was impossible on the set while he did make it.
---
His autobios noted that while he LOVED old-time old guy tough guy directors like Robert Aldrich(The Longest Yard, Hustle), he HATED "arrogant young film school punks withe beards." Which he found Paul Thomas Anderson to be. They came to blows and some of that anger can be seen in Reyholds PERFORMANCE when he fires porn star Mark Wahlberg by the pool.
---
However, IMO - its some of the best actual acting he ever did.
---
Sure is...its like a very late breaking payoff on how good he was in..Deliverance. Note, for instance, how cool and deep and manly his VOICE is, in that movie. Its a movie star voice. I once rented a "book on tape" read by Reynolds late in his career(one of those Spenser for Hire books)...and just in VOICE ALONE, he was a great private eye.
Anyway, in Boogie Nights, Reynolds uses a manly, seductive manner both to lure Wahlberg into porn acting AND to lord over a "makeshift family" of throwaway people. You always oddly take this guy for a GOOD guy, a NICE guy in a very rough world. Even when he goes berserk and beats a guy nearly to death near the end, it is for FATHERLY reasons.
I don't recall Reynolds roles after Boogie NIghts, I'd have to look 'em up. But right near the end he got a fine little indie ("The Last Movie Star")where he played himself under another name and acted scenes -- as an OLD MAN -- against clips of himself as a YOUNG man(in Deliverance and Smokey) and for us all the idea of how time ages us all hit hard.
I was particularly moved by a moment where Reynolds looks at an empty bed and flashbacks to one, two, three, four young hot women landing on the bed that he easily bedded once upon a time. THAT hurts(except I understand that old male movie stars can ALWAYS get young women -- see: Tony Curtis at the end.)
Reynolds early career was before my time so I can't really comment.
When I started watching movies (late 70s) -he was already on top.
Reynolds early career was before my time so I can't really comment.
---
Not before MY time. Ouch. Ha. Well I was there...though too young to watch his "Gunsmoke" years. I do recall he had a New York cop show called "Hawk"(the character was partially Native American.) No moustache.
"In the beginning," all the TV guide articles were about how much Burt(with no moustache) looked like Marlon Brando. And I think he did a Brando impression on a Twilight Zone or Alfred Hitchcock TV episode. And Brando HATED the comparison.
Eventually, Reynolds wore the moustache more often than not, and got compared more to Cary Grant(for suave comedy) or even James Garner than to Serious Brando (who was up for the Reynolds role in Deliverance, but just too old and out of shape for it).
--
When I started watching movies (late 70s) -he was already on top
---
It was pretty amazing how fast it happened. The TV career just DIDN'T MATTER. Also, I think that Burt Reynolds CONSTANT talk show appearances -- the exact opposite of Jack Nicholson -- endeared him to a select group of fans.
Reynolds is pretty funny at the 1973 Oscars(for 1972) films, making gentle fun of Robert Redford from the stage(Redford wasn't there.) Reynolds looks out at the camera to address "Bob" (who surely wasn't watching, either) -- "up on your mountain where you live, Bob" and generally to make fun that Reynolds KNEW Redford had more "prestige credentials" -- "But I ask you, Bob, unlike me -- have you ever been asked to be on Hollywood Squares?"
Ok thanks for the background on Reynolds. I do recall, in an interview near the end of his life, talking about how he was compared to Brando. And that Brando didn't like him.
Yeah, he (Reynolds) had the charming, funny, good ole boy thing going on. First one I remember was "The Longest Yard. Then Smokey and Hooper came along - suddenly thrusting him into the big time. The thing about Burt Reynolds is he's a likable person. He doesn't come off like a phony. Certainly, you'd have to have something going on to have the career longevity he did.
I didn't realized it until he was on a soap box in NY earlier this year delivering the same a**hole thug shtick he does in all his films.
shareHow does De Niro give the “same performance” in Cape Fear, Taxi Driver, Meet the Parents, Casino, Everybody’s Fine, Analyze This, Ronin, Heat, Jackie Brown, Frankenstein, Awakenings, Untouchables, Angel Heart, and Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle ???
Wow!😮
I dislike his politics, but I refuse to trivialize his career.
Yes, politics from any celebrity is annoying.
Yes, he's provided decades of performances that were quite entertaining.
We all need to not associate their politics with their work.
The problem is he actually does give the same performance.
And it's the same thing over and over again
How did I get here?
Look at , "The Score" a fine film. But it's the same performance. Is he an angry Grandpa? Is he a star in The Godfather Part II? Is he the headliner in Cape Fear? Is he father in Meet the Parents?
It's same thing over and over again.
It's all the same stupid ass shit. Over and over...
Can you see this man doing Birdman and Beetlejuice?
The answer is of course NO and he's way out of his element.
He has a range of around 5.
This why people hate Hollywood.
Godfather II, Midnight Run & Backdraft are good movies with varied performances from comedy to mafioso. Godfather II is not only his best performance, but probably among the top 50 performances in cinema history. He's that good as the young Vito, just fantastic.
share