Moving Talking Pictures

By Mohammad A. Qayyum

Pacino or De Niro?

Who is the better actor? Bobby or Al? The more intellectual amongst you would most likely baulk at the question and argue that great artistes such as these cannot be compared. That it would be an insult to compare the two like two watermelons, etc. Well, to that I say: Poppycock. This article is not for you gentlemen and ladies. It is for us film buffs who would rather fight wars over simple film trivia and trivialities and try to convince one another of how Godfather III (1990) was not really directed by the master Francis Ford Coppola but was in fact directed by a Chinese monk-spirit which took over Coppola’s body when his brain was vacationing in Sicily. Either that or it was directed by Francis’ evil twin Mongo. This article, you see, will be the thoughts of a subjective buff trying to be objective, somewhat, about the once champion of acting and the pretender to his crown.

Back in the seventies and mid-eighties I would have said it was no contests at all: Al was the man. So what if De Niro boxed with Jake LaMotta for Raging Bull (1980)? Demi Moore shaved her head for G. I. Jane and that certainly did not make her a great actress. De Niro for all his method-actor madness, I would have said, was a two-note actor: admittedly he played his ‘You looking at me’ notes better than anyone else in the business but then again most of his other roles were variations of the same Travis Bickle threatening character. Admitedly, he also went to outrageous lengths for the roles he undertook (gained a lot of weight to play Al Capone in Untouchables (1997) and Jake LaMotta in decline) but did his acting really move you? At least I thought not. Al, on the other hand, I thought, had greater range. Did you see him go snake cold in Godfather II indicating to his henchman to kill his brother right at the time he was hugging the same brother? Did you see the panic Al portrayed in Godfather I when his character Michael is stuck in the bathroom fumbling for a gun with which he was to go out and shoot his dad’s attackers? Do you recall how he morphed the initially goody-two-shoes character of Michael Corleone into the ice-cool take-charge future mob-boss, when the time came for him to protect Marlon Brando from his would-be assassins. The righteous anger portrayed by Al in Serpico (1973), the flustered confusion of Dog Day Afternoon (1975) (“Attica ! Attica!”) and the breakdown in And Justice For All (1979) (‘This whole trial is out of order’) were all huge peaks coming so close together that one had to pause and wonder if there had ever been a greater actor or could there even be a greater one? People who suggested, yes, Bobby De Niro was a greater one, were promptly laughed out of town.

Scarface (1983) soon followed the earlier peaks and though Al over-acted to the max in the movie, enough to turn Tony Montana into a caricature at times, one took it on its terms and marveled at Al’s newfound ability to go over the top if he wanted to. He had after all been mostly understated previously with Godfather II and even Serpico. One argued that this was just him broadening his spectrum and he would be back to his normal acting mode soon enough. Pity it never happened. Al went into decline as over-acting seemed to become the norm for him. Dick Tracy’s Big Boy Caprice (1990) became the caricature Al seemed to aim more and more for rather than the broken heroes and anti heroes he had crafter in the past. Heat (1995), City Hall (1996) and worst of all Devil’s Advocate (1997) really were the grossest betrayal of talent through hamming it up. Sadly, the more he hammed it up the more most of the public would love him. Scent of a woman (1992) if you ask me was putrid but everyone who did not know the first thing about acting seemed to love it. Here was Al acting as if he wanted to be Bobby DeNiro. He overacted (“Hoo haa”) all the way to an Oscar nomination. That he won the award was more a testament to the academy’s mindless affinity towards awarding actors who portrayed persons with disabilities than anything else. Plus at the end of the day the votes Al garnered were possibly sympathy votes for the body of work he had previously done but not been awarded for than for the performance he actually rendered as the blind and bitter Lt. Col. Frank Slade.

While he overacted, even then there have been some highlights. The silent scream at the end of Godfather III when his character’s daughter is gunned down was brilliant. Credit for that, come to think of it, must actually go to the Coppola-monk-spirit who took out the sound on that scene. But Michael Corleone’s confession in the same movie for a lifetime of sin and murder to a startled priest is pure Al. Or just the fact that he managed to survive the Godfather III disaster with his reputation intact was an achievement. As was the note-perfect weariness, mediocrity and ultimate doom (and the dignity with which the character accepts it) portrayed in the character of Lefty Ruggerio in Donnie Brasco (1997). The Insider’s Lowel Bergman was effectively played as a kinsman of the righteous Serpico, though age seemed to here taken the edge and anger off of Al and the character. Still, the middle of the road performances and roles abounded: Any Given Sunday (1999), Insomnia (2002) and even Glengarry Glen Ross (1992) (where Al was outacted by Jack Lemmon and even Alec Baldwin) were middling but not spectacular. Cruising, Sea of Love, Author Author, Revolution, Simone and even the latest Recruit have basically been bad with bad acting from Al on auto-pilot.

De Niro on the other hand has improved after experiencing a slump similar to what Al seems to be wallowing in. In fact a recent re- examination of De Niro’s body of work now has made me believe that he is a heck of an actor and really the race for the best actor of them all is more close run race than I first imagined.

Clearly like Al, De Niro’s peak was in the ‘70s as he towered above most in Mean Streets, Godfather II, Taxi Driver, Deer Hunter and Raging Bull. The method was in place and he portrayed doomed troubled men with intensity rarely matched ever since. Even by him. Though he did often try to little or no effect. Cape Fear and The Fan demonstrated what is bad about De Niro’s acting, that regardless of what role he takes on he still is Robert De Niro the threatening. Nevertheless he managed to vary his roles slightly enough to be memorable in Casino, Sleepers, Men of Honor, Goodfellas, Untouchables and Angelheart (his devil was better than Al’s). He did also to his credit attempt to play against type in A Bronx Tale and Mad Dog and Glory but each’s failure, commercial and otherwise, showed the limited range De Niro had, or so one thought.

De Niro actually has recently broadened his range quite a bit into comedy. He has proven actually to be quite adept at it. He has managed this primarily by spoofing his own mean and intense persona. Meet the Parents and Analyse This and That each demonstrate his comedic timing and even though they were not too large a stretch for him, they still show his lighter touch. Al, the chameleon, still seems to have failed to make us laugh. All the laughs he has ever managed have come out of the horrid Author Author or the recent Simone (2002) which was so bad at times that it was unintentionally hilarious.

Overall it seems that De Niro has gotten better out of his slump. He has won more. Either that or his gambles have been more public and available to us. Al has done less movies (38 according to IMDB.com), turning often to his first love theatre for his more inspired performance. De Niro has done 68 movies to date, 30 more and has therefore tended to have done a couple of better films since.

In comparison, a couple of weaknesses appear in both actor’s resume. These actors contrary to popular belief are not consummate masters in all genres. Both of them cannot do romance to save their respective lives. Al’s efforts at romantic comedy have been quite lame: Frankie & Johnny (1992) was a disaster with Al and Michelle Pfeiffer generating lesser screen energy currently available in Iraq. Mad Dog and Glory was similarly bad for De Niro. Beyond romance, their credentials in the pure action genre are questionable too. Heat was passable. Ronin for De Niro was good but is an exception to the rule. Of pure action movies there is little else to speak of in either actor’s resume.

In looking at their careers in parallel, it is sad to note that the two masters have also not worked with each other too often. They have managed it only twice. Once on Godfather II where they did not have share the screen in any scene. Secondly, the two actors met in Heat in which neither of the two bothered or managed to heat the screen up too much. One therefore remains in anticipation of a showdown where both of them would be in peak form. However, in light of the fact that both seem to be aging quite badly, the seems more and more unlikely. Perhaps an old-age Mathau-Lemmon like pairing may be called for. The could call it Grumpy Old Masters.

So what conclusion have we arrived at the end of it all. Well, as with all discussions between film buffs, none at all. The point in the first place was the discussion, not arrival at a conclusion. If you didn’t get that at the start, then you have just wasted your time with this article. Actually, the one question we can possibly settle right now is who at his peak was better? Well, on that count, I think, Al is the definite champ. Godfather I & II, Scarface, Serpico as compared to Mean Streets, Raging Bull, etc. Definitely Al. But then again mayhaps I am biased and I live on in hope of Al retaining his long lost glory. After all, of the two I have been calling Al Pacino by his first name and Robert De Niro by his last. But then again mayhaps this needs to be the subject of another article. Till that time, I suggest you have a peek at the mentioned movies and make up your own mind for now. And then allow me to prove you to convince Al is the better one.