I'm going with DeNiro.
Pacino was a little here and there. Whereas DeNiro brought his A game from start to finish.
Plus I don't like Pacino's weird tan in this movie. Reminds me of Kramer when he's the turkey. It's a very sweaty looking tan, if that makes sense.
And kicking that perfectly good TV out of the car was also weird. Not sure why that happened.
Pacino 'went big', didn't he. Whereas I felt De Niro underplayed it (relatively speaking). I enjoyed them both and thought they were equally good. Just different kinds of performances.
shareWhen Pacino 'went big', I recoiled.
Really? I loved it. I guess I could see it, but it is my opinion that Pacino went big, but never over-the-top. It's not a hammy performance, it's just an intense one from a character who brings the big guns.
shareMan, I think he constantly went over the top. That's been the last 20 years of his roles, for the most part.
shareI'm drawing a distinction between a big, brassy performance (which he undoubtedly gives) and one which is unnecessarily bombastic (what most people seem to accuse him of).
Pacino does go big, yes, but my point here is that it suits the character, he still gets a lot of nuance and subtle moments in addition to the loud ones - he has a lot of dynamics in his work, people forget that, too - and he shouldn't be lambasted for going loud.
So, maybe I should get your definition of "over the top" before completely disagreeing. This might be a semantic dispute, not a core disagreement.
He's a good actor, don't get me wrong, but even in heat he went big in places that it didn't seem necessary. The "GREAT ASS!!" line seemed almost a parody of him going big. And the scene with the guy banging his girl and the TV too. He sort of became known for that type of delivery, and he leaned into too much sometimes. To his credit, even though Oceans 13 wasn't great, he played that character with subtlety. And it was sort of a Vegas wiseguy, so he didn't have to.
shareI suppose it depends on what you mean by "necessary," but I think it was. Rather, I think that the way he played Hanna, he gave the character a very aggressive, very bombastic delivery - particularly when he's in "cop mode" with certain people. He does his little "Risin'" song when he's keeping a slippery witness on the backfoot; he screams "Because she's got a GREAT ASS! And you got your head ALL THE WAY UP IT!" when he's keeping a twitchy asset in play. I think some of this is deliberate theatricality from Vincent, not just Al.
As for the television, he's pissed. He comes home and finds a blatant affair going on and he's up to his eyeballs dealing with Neil and his crew, and he snaps. The way he does this is by being weirdly calm right up until he's yelling. That oscillation is because Vincent doesn't quite know what to do from moment to moment either.
All of this might feel uneven to some, over-the-top to others, but to me, it feels like a character who lives life on the edge (as Vincent says) and is a performance that always feels alive and as chaotic as a real life person in the middle of a maelstrom of a life.
We've already discussed that the guy is confirmed behind the scenes as doing coke, but even without that, I think there's a lot of on-screen justification for why Vincent is the way he is. Al Pacino takes a hard-boiled cop character and pushes it to its limits. I think it works 100% of the time an it's one of the most dynamic performances of Pacino's career.
And it's subtle. Yes. Subtle.
Look at the way he plays the hospital scene. Take a second look at his sarcastic understatement with the "cold chicken" scene. Take a look at the fear and pain and panic that he fights when he finds his step-daughter in the tub. This is not just a guy overacting, this is a guy building a whole internal life for a character.
GIVE ME ALL YOU GOT!!!
Also, Hanna was originally written to be dependent on cocaine (can anyone who’s read the script verify if this was left in), so his temperamental disposition makes sense from a writing/acting stand point.
Should have had him doing lines because I couldn't figure out the tv scene. He lost me on that one.
shareI think the tv scene was a combination of factors, one, Hanna didn’t give two shits about the tv, it was another man ballin’ his wife and then watching his tv, that pissed him off, and taking it was just an exercise in emotional projection, instead of getting mad at Justine and giving her what she wanted, he took his frustration out on an inanimate object instead.
Him kicking his tv out the car was him realizing how stupid the whole thing was and that he never cared about the tv. It was also a form of release, haven’t you ever hit something because you were angry, usually hurting yourself in the process.
Both instances were a display of emotional immaturity which imo he gets a pass on given everything going on in his life at that moment.
I also like the fact that he wasn’t verbally or physically abusive to Justine or Ralph during the “got ya” moment, relatively speaking that is, yes he yelled and called her a bitch but she had that coming given the circumstances.
Found this Pacino interview, it’s chopped up a bit but works well to showcase Hanna’s personality/behavior relative to cocaine use.
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/NJ3HPlLhsQA
I think both were mighty in this film, and it's really hard to choose. I think Pacino takes bigger risks and has more dynamic range. I know you didn't like his go-big moments, but I thought they were the perfect accents to the character. When he's at home with his family or confronting De Niro, he's as nuanced, quiet, and intense as you like. The yelling and shouting is Vincent Hanna getting in-character when he needs to talk a certain way around certain people. The intensity of the character, to me, makes the picture hum.
Still, if they had both gone intense, the contrast wouldn't be there, and just as Hanna needs to be wired, so does MacCauley need to be aloof and taciturn. Both actors brought their A-game and both did what was needed for their part. That's why it's so hard to choose.
Gun to my head? Pacino nails it here. Every moment is perfect. He's never predictable, but he's always in-line with the character. It all looks amazing and it's as entertaining as it is tragic. De Niro maybe relies on his "old favourites" in terms of his acting ticks.
The TV thing was because Hanna was angry. He blew up because his wife betrayed him and he was feeling hurt. He took the TV, but because it was part of his tirade, it was reminding him of his failings as a husband and how his wife failed him, so he ejected it from his life.
I just don't get the TV scene. Are the people at the bus stop meant to want that tv? Like 'hey peasants, here's a tv, let me wreck it though so you can't use it.'
Odd.
I think the people at the bus stop are curious at first, and then see this guy sitting there with the TV. They don't know what to think yet. I, as a viewer, the first time I watched Heat, thought, "Oh, he's gonna give them the TV, that's funny," and then when he kicked it, it was funnier still and more surprising.
What are we "supposed" to think? I don't know. I assumed it was a bit of a fake-out punchline, but one that was used to underline Pacino's frustration and anger in that moment (all the stuff I mentioned above). I don't think Vincent Hanna was thinking about the people at the bus stop at all. I think his mind was on other things and wouldn't have really noticed any of them beyond registering that there were people there. So, I don't think he was thinking of them as wanting the TV or anything at all, he was just existing with his own anger.
In this film, DeNiro. Pacino went so big it was like he was doing a parody of acting.
In general, over both of their careers, I think Pacino might be the better actor overall. DeNiro has dialed in too many performances.
Pacino comedy = Jack and Jill
DeNiro comedy = Meet The Parents
I know which one had me laughing and which one didn't.
DeNiro is the better all round actor.
I've never seen either one of those films but DeNiro was hilarious on SNL way back in the day so you might be right.
shareWow you haven't seen Meet The Parents? Check it out. It's aged a bit due to being 2 decades old but it still is a situational comedy and funny (despite some of it being a little too unbelievable.)
shareDe Niro = Rocky and Bullwinkle plus a host of dreadful comedies, more than any other genre for his whole career.
Pacino has only done a couple of cringe comedies.
No comparion - De Niro loses.
Nah, Pacino's the better all round actor. Jack and Jill was a poor film. It's not a fair way to judge Pacino's comedic ability.
His performances in Dick Tracy and Scent Of A Woman are funnier than any of De Niro's comedic performances.
I think if i say dinero thats just personal bias.
But i dont think Pacino played it up too much. It suited his character perfectly
If we saw him doing coke, I'd be more inclined to buy his outrageous character. Plus he's such a new yorker and apparently he works for the LAPD, so it also was a fish outta water for me.
shareI think they were both excellent. But personally, I liked De Niro more. One of my favorite performances of his.
Both were very good and I read where both men adlibbed alot of their dialogue together since both have known one another for like basically EVER since the Godfather II days.. HEAT is one of the Best, but not the best.. That currently belongs to The TOWN with Ben Affleck & Jeremy Renner and 2nd would have to be DEN OF THIEVES.. Not sure how a DEN OF THIEVES sequel is going to do though??
shareNot a lot in it but if I had to pick I'd go with Pacino.
shareDeniro crushed it, even though he was doing some shit performances at this point, but this wasn't one. Pacino was doing the same thing he usually does now, and it's usually the same character in various movies.
share