Xtratime Community banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Honourable Mention, October 2011 Photo Contest
Joined
·
18,041 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I saw a thread where Pacino and De niro compete for best actor and the truth is that both can suck, specially Pacino (his worst role: Perfume de mujer, what was that jAAAA!!!!! thing). In movies the last word SHOULD (sadly so few times the directors have the final cut) be in the director, better perfomances=great directors, that can control the egocentric aspect of the actors. example great perfomance of pacino in Godfather....NEWS HE PLAYED A ROLE; HE DOESN?T PLAY PACINO BAG OF TRICKS!!! . I always remember people talking about the Pacino-De Niro scene in the Michael Mann movie, what was that???? everybody watching a PACINO-DE NIRO scene, and no what they should see TWO CHARACTERS playing a role. Finally I think both have the skills and talent that a a good director can use and explore in search for the best scene, and some "actors" doesn't even have that: Keanu Reeves for instance. There they are actors that can save themselves in awfull movies like usually Robert Mitchun, Gene Hackman, Ed Harris, Daniel Day Lewis, Sean Penn, but always their would be great in movies with a great director serving a good story, or at least they could have. Those like Hanks, Bresson, Coppola, Kurosawa, etc can make act anybody, examples: Tarantino and Travolta in pulp fiction, or Coppola needs an idiot, a refrigerator in dracula: Reeves, the same refrigerator need in Apocalypse now: Sheen (he fired Harvey Keitel, a so much talented actor than Sheen but that continuosly overacts for what he needs in that movie, for instance in Ferrara's movies that quality of Keitel shines). Well I don't like the trend of only following the actors involved, 95% of the time you will find a rubbish films, but there is light in Tarantino, Lynch, Burton, and so many, and of course there egos can display a bad film, but is there a lot more chances of watching a great film. In history there it was the great and only Welles that his errors and ego was so great, that even show beautifull, he usually use himselve, he has his vision and doesn't wan't to be ruined, so there thay are The Lady of Shangai, The Citizen Kane, Touch of evil, masterpieces, give me a thousand of good telling stories from Clint and his ice acting of spaghetti western, or Jean louie Tringtinat acting in Il sorpasso, than that Pacino's Oscars JAAA!!! crap; or give that pleasure to the eyes that is Kill Bill. It's an opinon and I see you coming because I attack Pacino, or De Niro, but for me the essence of a great film is based on a good story and a good director that can carry that, when the actor star system, marketing ending cuts, get involved... crap. I recommend one of the greatest movie ever: Bresson's Pickpocket... perfect, simple and beautifull, also educational if you want to dedicate to crime.
 

·
Second Place winner, October 2012 XT Photo Contest
Joined
·
3,938 Posts
Pacino is extremely over-rated. DeNiro used to be a great actor, sublimating his persona for the good of the role, but now he is just playing "Robert DeNiro." Pacino, on the other hand, IMO, was never more than a showy method hack, even in the 70s, and without a firm-handed director (which he hasn't had since The Godfather II--what young director would dare tell him "Al tone it down man"?), he turns to ham. Good God, has anyone watched Dog Day Afternoon or And Justice For All recently? Horrible. And unlike UK hams (Richard Harris, Julian Sands and Richard Burton come to mind), American ham actors aren't even fun to watch overact. ;)

As for Keanu...well, he is good looking. But he cannot act. If people must insist on seeing him on screen, why not take the advice of a local comedian (who was talking about Darryl Hanna), and just put a mute photo of him up in the righthand corner of the screen, and let the film continue unharmed. :D

But really, it doesn't matter in the end. Showy hams and impossibly handsome actors have always been over-rated and will always be. Its no big deal really. :)

RIO
 

·
Honourable Mention, October 2011 Photo Contest
Joined
·
18,041 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Your are right, but the reason of this thread in fact wasn't an attack to De NIro, or Pacino, or any actor, instead is an opinion about the importance I use to see many peolple give when they have to choose a film to the actors involve, and that' s nonsense, the only thing to choose is the director, and more than often giving a chance to someone unknown, actors are tools that in proper hands excell and in improper or their own hand 90% suck. and that is a big deal because there is less space for better movies, and is funny to see that many people left the cinema saying what acrap was the pacino movie, and in the next month there they are again in the newest Deniro- Pacino- Tom Cruise- and The nice and gentle african american Denzel as chief of police in a MEGA TOTAL IMPACT SERIAL KILLER SMASHING POP CORN MOVIE!!!
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top