Maybe ruined is a bit harsh, but he kills the rewatchability of this movie for me. He overacts and is way too intense and not in a good way. I feel like this movie could've been on par or much closer in quality to Goodfellas if he was replaced by a more natural actor like Ed Norton or even Ethan Hawke would've been more suitable for this role. Anything but DiCaprio with his overacting and ham-fisted facial expressions. And his accent was all over the place.
shareHoly crap I thought he was the best part of the movie. I could feel the stress in his face. I mean, he was walking on eggshells the entire movie. He didn't want to be there. He was forced. Every second he thought he was going to get whacked. Nobody was helping him. He was all alone.
Frankly, I thought it was his best work, maybe tied with Blood Diamond.
That's the problem, he looked too stressed out to the point where Costello and his crew would easily be able to tell he doesn't belong there. The role required a bit more subtlety. You don't need to look like you're shitting your pants in every scene to show that you're stressed.
shareI disagree, DiCaprio nailed the role, it was his unease, innocence, nativity…., that drew Costello in to trusting him, and wanting to mentor him. Frank even asks Billy at one point, paraphrasing, “Why don’t you go back to college…,” Frank trusted Billy because he wasn’t a subtle, disconnected, desensitized sociopath like everyone else on his crew. It was Billy’s humanity that drew Frank in, and it worked marvelously.
shareBut that would've tipped him off immediately that Billy is the rat. Someone like Costello would've sniffed that out immediately, especially since DiCaprio looked constantly stressed like he's gonna shit his pants. The role required a bit more nuance than that.
shareI might be inclined to agree with your point if Billy had joined Frank’s crew in a different manner, emotionally void, no signs of vulnerability…, but from the moment Frank sits next to him at the bar, Billy maintains that genuine presence, tough, self reliant, but also vulnerable, a bit nervous but not rat or informant type nervous, more like a nervous tension given off by someone who has a moral compass, a bit of empathy, humanity…, and again, I think Frank sniffs that immediately and in his own way admires that about Billy, combine that with Frank knowing and respecting both his Uncle and Father, he takes it upon himself to mentor the kid.
Billy is who he presents himself to be, which is why Frank ultimately trusts him the most and leaves all the tapes with him at the end.
Wow good observation... I never thought about this before... and now that u mentioned it ur right
Leo doesn’t come across convincing... he is not from the streets... it looks fake... and him acting hard & mean looks cringeworthy
I can definitely picture Ed Norton or Ethan Hawke play this part... they woulda bought more natural grit
He stole the show in my opinion. Couldn’t disagree more.
shareMaybe it's just me, but I've never been able to buy DiCaprio as a tough guy (i.e. The Departed, Gangs of New York). When he plays a part closer to himself (Great Gatsby, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood), he can do good work. And you're right that his accent was a mess (same for Gangs of New York). He should take the Sean Connery approach and always use his regular voice.
shareLeo made this movie entertaining. Such an underrated actor.
shareI disagree, DiCaprio rocks.
share"He overacts and is way too intense and not in a good way."
That's his usual style.
I guess I agree. It's odd. Because DiCaprio's performance is what I initially loved about the movie. But after watching this movie a bunch of times over the years, I now think he's the weakest part of it. The in your face dramatics is very attention grabbing, but eventually the shine wears off and it feels very out of place.
shareI think if what you used to love was his performance, then realised it's the weakest part. What you're really saying is this movie is awesome.
share