MovieChat Forums > Prince of the City (1981) Discussion > Treat Williams: amazing performance

Treat Williams: amazing performance

posted 18 years ago by Crispin_Dry
19 replies | jump to latest

Was anyone else here blown away by the power and strength of Treat Williams' excellent performance in Prince of the City? Anyone who knows him only as the hunky dad on Everwood needs to see this movie to realise what a great dramatic actor he can be. He got a Golden Globe nomination and a lot of rave reviews for Prince of the City, but I'm personally very surprised that he didn't get an Oscar nomination for this role. Hell, I think he should have won the Oscar for this film. It really was an incredibly strong, passionate and committed performance.

[–] mikeminetti 18 years ago

I agree 100%. How he did not get even a nomination is a mystery to me.

[–] fordonez1 18 years ago

Yeah, i adore this film. Treat Williams' performance is amazing, and committed is the right word..

[–] Crispin_Dry 18 years ago

I'm so glad there are at least a few others out there who appreciate the genius of Treat Williams' performance here. He goes through so many layers of hell over the course of this three-hour movie that there are times where it's emotionally and spiritually draining just to watch him.

[–] Lunar_Park 17 years ago

I just got this movie through Netflick and I'll be watching it tonight. I'm excited to hear Treat's performance was so amazing. I believe he is one of the most underrated actors in Hollywood.

I fell for Treat's acting after I saw HAIR then I saw his short stint in "Once Upon A Time In America"....and I did like "Journey to the Center of the Earth" even though he was forcing that horrible accent.

Thanks for the input!

*Death makes angels of us all and gives us wings where we had shoulders smooth as raven's claws*

[–] mikeminetti 17 years ago

Tough year for Treat. Henry Fonda was the sentimental favorite, then you had one of the best comedic performances of all-time from Dudley Moore as Arthur, and a trio of nobodies named Warren, Burt, and Paul. All that being said, I still think Treat should have won.

BEST ACTOR NOMINEES FOR 1981:

Henry Fonda - On Golden Pond as Norman Thayer Jr.
Warren Beatty - Reds as John Reed
Burt Lancaster - Atlantic City as Lou Pascal
Dudley Moore - Arthur as Arthur Bach
Paul Newman - Absence of Malice as Michael Colin Gallagher

[–] rrb 17 years ago

Yelling and weeping don't make a great performance. Often, as in this case, they're the devices a second-rate dramatic actor uses to convey passion. That's emoting, not acting.

This movie would've been much better with a better actor than Williams at its center--a DeNiro or Pacino. Treat's charming and engaging, but the more demanding scenes were beyond him.

Of the principal actors, Jerry Orbach gets top honors.

[–] mikeminetti 17 years ago

Orbach was great as usual, but I disagree on Treat. Surprising that you use Pacino as an example of someone who could have done better, because of all the first-class actors out there (and I consider him one), he is the most prone to over-acting. The 2 performances I NEVER get tired of watching are Malcolm McDowell in A Clockwork Orange and Treat in Prince. Both were sadly denied even a nomination.

[–] Mrs_Bundy 17 years ago

An extremely nuanced performance that captured Danny's complex, conflicted and shifting interiorized states perfectly. Like many other talented actors, Treat Williams was not well served by the Academy.

[–] rrb 17 years ago

"Extremely nuanced"--LOL! Like the scene where he screaming in Capalino's living room to convey his anger? He flails a lot in this part, unconvincingly. He's a charming, likable actor, as per his work in The Ritz, DB Cooper and Hair, but this heavy dramatic role was beyond him.

[–] Doom 17 years ago

Prince Of The City received little to NO publicity at the time and I think, as usual with The Academy, that's what mostly lead to Williams' peformance being ignored.

That said, that was a HELL of a lineup for Best Actor this year. The only one I could see kicking off the list was... geez... dunno... Lancaster? Hard choice.

------

Wait a minute... who am I here?

[–] Mrs_Bundy 16 years ago

Ah, I think you're right about that.

[–] franzkabuki 16 years ago

There are a few instances of overacting, where his behaviour feels forced. But then there are also absolutely amazing scenes like the one at their yard barbecue where he breaks down laughing with desperation (how else could I put it). He´s pretty intense. And some of these occasional false notes are easily excusable with his youth and inexperience. Too bad things didn´t quite work out for him.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mr Blue-4 15 years ago

"That said, that was a HELL of a lineup for Best Actor this year. The only one I could see kicking off the list was... geez... dunno... Lancaster? Hard choice. "

Not hard at all. First of all, Burt Lancaster gave the best performance that year, along with Treat and Harold E. Rollins for "Ragtime" (I believe he was up for Supporting Actor). Of the rest that were nominated that year (1981) I haven't seen Paul Newman in "Absence of Malice" yet. But I do not think that Dudley Moore was worth it for "Arthur", esp. seeing as I find that movie totally unfunny. Henry Fonda did NOT give one of his best performances in "On Golden Pond", but that was all about giving him an Oscar before he died. Warren Beatty has always been well-liked, and he was the star of a big epic film.

Defintely Moore and perhaps Newman (who should of won the following year for "The Verdict") could have been nudged aside for Treat. But this was a NY crime film that came out in August and got noticed by the critics but passed over by whoever did the voting that year.

[–] Doom 15 years ago

Just wanted to throw in here after your post. I personally don't think Fonda deserved it either, but no way he WASN'T going to get it (for the reason you mentioned).

I think Newman was good, but not better than Treat. But I'd kick Newman off the list before Dudley Moore. To me, Moore's performance was well worth the nomination, but I know we'll have to agree to disagree on that one...

------

Wait a minute... who am I here?

[–] Mr Blue-4 15 years ago

Just wanted to throw in here after your post. I personally don't think Fonda deserved it either, but no way he WASN'T going to get it (for the reason you mentioned).

I've always said that, given the circumstances with Fonda, they might have given it to him for "The Great Smokey Roadblock" if they had to.

[–] ProfessorFate 16 years ago

this heavy dramatic role was beyond him.

I don't know what movie you were watching, rrb, but I doubt it was "Prince of the City".

Williams has many great moments in this film: some over the top, some subtle, and many in between. He's playing a character who's honestly not the brightest guy. He's got some guilt eating away at him and he sees a way to purge it . . . but he doesn't work out the angles to see what it will cost him down the road.

I think Williams does a great job as a man slowly unraveling. The sudden moments of rage are totally believeable to me, but there are plenty of under played moments as well. Take the backyard barbeque scene, where he finally tells his partners that he's helping internal affairs. Williams pretty much plays every scale of emotion in that one sequence.

Another consideration - Williams is in nearly every scene of a very long movie. It's not just a great performance, it's an acting marathon.

I agree with those who say he should have been nominated for an Oscar. I love Paul Newman, but I might have bumped him or Lancaster for Williams. Certainly "Absence Of Malice" is not among my favorite Newman performances. Jerry Orbach deserved a supporting nod as well.

"Push the button, Max!"

[–] Doom 16 years ago

It's not just a great performance, it's an acting marathon.

You said it. And one of the best I've ever seen.

------

Wait a minute... who am I here?

[–] valro 15 years ago

I can't understand why Treat Williams never became a bigger name than he did. He was excellent in this movie as well as some of the other late 1970s and early 1980s movies he appeared in.