View Full Version : Robert De Niro - not as good as he used to be
I watched The Score last night. Absolutely brilliant. Probably film of the year for me. The only gripe is that De Niro acts pretty much the same way in most of his films for the past 10 years or so (Cape Fear and Jackie Brown are obvious exceptions.) What I am trying to say is that with his undoubted acting skills, he should vary his roles a lot more. Does anyone agree/disagree?
Well look at some of the films in made early on in his career.
The Godfather II
The Deer Hunter
Raging Bull
They're all universally recognised as great pieces of work, both as movies and for De Niro's performances. He was good in The Untouchables and Midnight Run aswell as Cape Fear. More recently Meet The Parents was critically well received.
Maybe it's a case of De Niro not having enough quality material available rather than lowering his own standards.
i wouldnt accuse him of that at the end of the day he is one hell of a fine actor. one person i would accuse of "playing the same role in every movie" however is Michael Douglas.
Dear Mr Echo
11-12-2001, 09:18
With regard to Micheal Douglas I sort of know what you mean - you tend to think "the tycoon with troubles"- but actually looking at his films most of his roles are quite different to each other - Falling Down, Basic Instinct and he did remarkably different characters in One Night at McCools and Wonder Boys.
I think with DeNiro the thing is that Hollywood is a very different place to make movies now than it was in the 70's. Can you imagine a major studio making Taxi Driver now? If DeNiro was prepared to do independent films he might have some better roles to get his teeth into but its also a case of what he gets offered. I think if I was him at his age I would just take the money too!!!:)
Andrew
De Niro's problem has always been his inability to transmit true emotion effectively on screen. Watch the Deer Hunter and see his attempts at deep emotion compared to Christopher Walken and Meryl Streep. De Niro's performance in places is as good as anything he's done but does not quite have the whole deal.
Raging Bull is better but it is a raw energy that he excels at. Seldom is he called upon nowadays to let his barriers down, mainly because he's never been very good at it. The Mission and Awakenings are two of the most blatantly forced performances. Watch Brando in On the waterfront and you'll see exactly what De Niro is missing. De Niro is best when playing characters who suppress their vulnerable side. (Heat, Casino, New York New York, King of Comedy, Jacknife)
Nevertheless De Niro is still one of the finest actors of his generation, but the reality is that his range is far more limited than the average Joe in the street might think. Add this to a dreadful habit of believing he can raise a film above the mundane purely by his own presence (i.e. We're no angels, Sleepers, The Fan, Meet the Parents, Stanley and Iris, Copland).
Ironically his most affecting performance of recent years was in a Bronx Tale, where he directed himself. What a shame he hasn't decided to pursue that route.
Fine fine actor yes, but watch his films carefully and don't believe all the hype.
Michael Brooke
11-12-2001, 12:38
Bear in mind that De Niro badly needs a <U>very</U> large income these days to support his hugely expensive TriBeCa project - so he's much less choosy about what he does than he used to be, and has taken on projects that the young De Niro wouldn't have touched with the proverbial ten-foot pole.
I do tend to agree with Snuffy, though - De Niro is unsurpassed within a relatively narrow range, but far less impressive when he attempts something outside his usual remit. He's significantly less versatile than his former <I>1900</I> costar Gerard Depardieu, for instance - can you imagine De Niro doing a verse-speaking costume drama or playing a gay transvestite burglar and pulling it off?
Lenny Nero
11-12-2001, 12:43
I don't see where the problem is.
If he takes on roles similar to those in Heat, The Score, Goodfellas and Casino, I'd be very happy.
If an actor is good at one thing and you enjoy his performances, doesn't mean he has to try some oddball roles, and he's too good to be typecasted.
can you imagine De Niro doing a verse-speaking costume drama or playing a gay transvestite burglar and pulling it off?
That's the type of thing he should do, and if he did pull them types of role off, he would be one of the greatest. Tom Hanks could and would pull them roles off, but to say he is in the same class as De Niro is laughable.
I think the Brando comparison is most apt. While at his peak Brando was a better actor than De Niro, both have suffered since their halcyon days, deciding that money for their own personal (however misguided) projects was more important than continued credibility.
Yes isolated gems exist but few of De Niro's performances in the last decade are of great merit. Likewise, post Godfather Brando lost interest having achieved most if not all of what he set out to from Streetcar onwards.
At present I don't see any 'great' actors who can waltz from one genre to another. No Gable, Cooper, Stewart, Marvin even Guinness who were adept at comedy and drama in equal measure. Hanks is a fine actor and probably the closest to matching them but De Niro still has more reserves, what a shame he sees fit not to utilise them anymore.
Truly great actors grow, develop and constantly surprise you with their versatility, humanity and credibility. Few now can achieve all that. Apart from Hanks, I'd mention Billy Bob Thornton, Morgan Freeman and (controversial) George Clooney, an old style star if ever there was one and the ever underrated Jeff Bridges.
Is it a coincidence that three of those were the lead in the last three Coen Bros films? I think not.
Yonathan Gal
11-12-2001, 15:00
He's been in some terriblw films (Frankenstein anyone?) but he has always been flawless, in EVERY film i've seen him in, despite however bad the film is... he's a genius. Him and Pacino are just mesmerising...
Michael Brooke
11-12-2001, 15:14
<B>At present I don't see any 'great' actors who can waltz from one genre to another. </B>
I named one earlier - Gerard Depardieu.
Arch Stanton
11-12-2001, 15:19
Originally posted by Michael Brooke
<B>At present I don't see any 'great' actors who can waltz from one genre to another. </B>
I named one earlier - Gerard Depardieu.
although Astrix and 102 Dalmations proved he can be as bad as De Niro in kids movies.
Shingster
11-12-2001, 16:27
Originally posted by Snuffy
At present I don't see any 'great' actors who can waltz from one genre to another.
Interesting Snuffy that you mention Coen Bros actors who fit that description, yet failed to mention John Turturro, who I think is one of the most versatile actors around. Kevin Spacey also has a good range.
From what I've seen of his work, I'd say that Leung Chiu Wai is also a very talented actor.
Jimmyboy
11-12-2001, 16:47
Originally posted by Snuffy
At present I don't see any 'great' actors who can waltz from one genre to another.
Keanu Reeves.
Disappearer
11-12-2001, 19:38
I think De Niro's talent is taken for granted these days, because he's so often brilliant, so often untouchable, that we're rarely surprised by his performances any more. He is a genius!
He's not the perfect performer that maybe a lot of his hoped he would be early on. Still, maybe, the best screen actor all round we've had so far. Check out Midnight Run for his emotional range, but it's all subtle stuff in an unsubtle film.
Today, four people stand above the rest. I'd include Marlon but he's just not interesting enough any more, and might never be again. Check out Don Juan DeMarco, boy, what a film he should have gone out on!
Hopkins
Nolte
DeNiro
Pacino
The latter two dont pick the best projects anymore, but what the hell. Anyone thinking of adding Spacey to that list is easy pleased! :-)
Nolte
DeNiro
Pacino
Hopkins
What? no Keanu?
*ducks*
:D
EDIT - oh, pfft, someone got there before me :rolleyes:
skye_storm
12-12-2001, 14:06
Originally posted by Michael Brooke
<B>At present I don't see any 'great' actors who can waltz from one genre to another. </B>
I named one earlier - Gerard Depardieu.
Kevin spacey!
Drama - american beauty and pay it forward,
Action - Negotiator
Black comedy - swimming with sharks
Thriller - serial killer in se7en, and a cripple in the usual suspects
And that is just the beginning he has pulled off some great performances as a hollywood cop, lawyers, a loopy (nutter/alien) in k-pax and even makes a superb Grasshopper (bugs life).
I challenge you to find a better and more versatlie actor, with no bad performances.
:)
Originally posted by Shingster
From what I've seen of his work, I'd say that Leung Chiu Wai is also a very talented actor. Hear, Hear!
Tho' he's better known as Tony Leung (Chiu Wai)
Pretty much my favourite actor working in HK.
Along with Lau Ching-Wan.
Originally posted by McD
He's not the perfect performer that maybe a lot of his hoped he would be early on. Still, maybe, the best screen actor all round we've had so far. Check out Midnight Run for his emotional range, but it's all subtle stuff in an unsubtle film.
Today, four people stand above the rest. I'd include Marlon but he's just not interesting enough any more, and might never be again. Check out Don Juan DeMarco, boy, what a film he should have gone out on!
Hopkins
Nolte
DeNiro
Pacino
The latter two dont pick the best projects anymore, but what the hell. Anyone thinking of adding Spacey to that list is easy pleased! :-)
Nolte !!!!! :nuts: :nuts: Shurley a mishtake shir
Nolte is consistently brilliant - "Affliction" and "Mother Night" contain superb work from him.
I'd add Gene Hackman, who is rarely bad even in the rubbish he mostly appears in nowadays (although "Heist" is good and "The Royal Tennenbaums" looks promising). He desperately needs another good leading role though.
Shingster
12-12-2001, 19:49
Originally posted by Garry Cowell
Hear, Hear!
Tho' he's better known as Tony Leung (Chiu Wai)
Pretty much my favourite actor working in HK.
Along with Lau Ching-Wan.
Lau Ching-Wan (AKA: Sean Lau) was excellent in full alert.
I'm really looking forward to Zhang yimou's Hero!! It looks like Maggie Cheung & Tony Leung (Chiu Wai) play the main roles, not Jet li!!
Gary Couzens
13-12-2001, 06:52
Another factor is that De Niro isn't as young and hungry as he once was, and the same applies to Pacino. However long someone's career may be, there's usually a period - a few years, a decade maybe - where you could say that they're at their peak. Very fine work may be done before and since, but ultimately their reputation will stand or fall on that peak period. If you want to judge De Niro or Pacino as actors, look to their work of the 70s In De Niro's case, up to and including <i>Raging Bull</i>. The 70s was Jack Nicholson's peak period too. For Brando, the 50s. Meryl Streep, late 70s to early 80s.
Once that peak is over, actors can succumb to laziness, self-parody, mannerism, or repetition, all of which are charges you can level at those I've named above. But if you're lucky, you'll get the occasional very fine performance, if you're very lucky a great one, but you don't get the sustained high quality that characterises a peak period. (For example, Brando may have peaked in the 50s, but he still gave us <i>Last Tango in Paris</i>.)
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.