Poll question: Pacino, De Niro, Hoffman

Poll result (25 votes) Pacino (6 votes) Vote De Niro (17 votes) Vote Hoffmann (2 votes) Vote

Actually, now thinking about it I wish I did. Hoffman is the most versatile of the three.

just because he's been somewhat consistent over the years. He hasn't made a slew of bad ones like DeNiro and Pacino have in their twilight (yes Confidence and the Meet the Parent's films, I know)...

that's funny, i didn't see you in http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=688787 . are you psyched for manglehorn? thoughts on his version of salome?

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

Pacino definitely out front. Idk why but i just ain't a big Hoffman fan. If i had to rate the best seventies actors i would definitely put Nicholson and Hackman above Hoffman. shit i might even put Robert Redford above Hoffman.

Bliss

Jimmy Conway, Sam Rothstein, and Neil McCauley

* His post '70s career has been better than Hoffman and De Niro.
* The only one to do film, television and theatre successfully.
* Doesn't phone it in as much as De Niro.
* Does more interesting stuff than Hoffman.
* Ever seen De Niro or Hoffman do Shakespeare? EXACTLY.


"Your current frequencies of understanding outweigh that which has been given for you to understand." Saul Williams

>* His post '70s career has been better than Hoffman and De
>Niro.

Actually, outside of Young Vito and Travis Bickle, the majority of De Niro's noteworthy movies were post-70s. I mean, look at how many classics, near-classics, and otherwise great rainy-day basic-cable watches there are on this list:

Raging Bull (1980)
The King of Comedy (1982)
Once Upon a Time in America (1984)
Brazil (1985)
The Untouchables (1987)
Midnight Run (1988)
Goodfellas (1990)
Cape Fear (1991)
A Bronx Tale (1993)
Casino (1995)
Heat (1995)
Sleepers - (1996) (Father Bobby rules)
Copland (1997)
Wag the Dog (1997)
Jackie Brown (1997)
Ronin (1998)
Analyze This (1999)
Meet the Parents (2000)
The Score (2001)

After that, it goes downhill, but that's obviously a great run. I'd take that list over Pacino's post-70s output, to be honest.

>* The only one to do film, television and theatre
>successfully.

>* Doesn't phone it in as much as De Niro.

Somewhat debatable. See the above list. Then add in everything from the 70s. That's over three decades of classics. He could have died or never made another movie after 2001 and he'd already be top five dead or alive. Point being, after all those years of churning out classics and working with serious directors, I don't really care that he phones it in for paychecks now.

Let's not pretend that Al ain't doing the same shit.

>* Does more interesting stuff than Hoffman.
>* Ever seen De Niro or Hoffman do Shakespeare? EXACTLY.

Don't me wrong, Pacino is a fucking thespian, no doubt. I just don't think it's as clear cut as you're making it. (That being said, I think Pacino>De Niro in their scenes together in Heat.)

The tie-breaker (in favor of De Niro) might be the fact that Pacino played female Adam Sander's love interest in Jack & Jill. There's just no coming back from that shit...

>>* His post '70s career has been better than Hoffman and De
>>Niro.
>
>Actually, outside of Young Vito and Travis Bickle, the
>majority of De Niro's noteworthy movies were post-70s. I mean,
>look at how many classics, near-classics, and otherwise great
>rainy-day basic-cable watches there are on this list:
>
>Raging Bull (1980)
>The King of Comedy (1982)
>Once Upon a Time in America (1984)
>Brazil (1985)
>The Untouchables (1987)
>Midnight Run (1988)
>Goodfellas (1990)
>Cape Fear (1991)
>A Bronx Tale (1993)
>Casino (1995)
>Heat (1995)
>Sleepers - (1996) (Father Bobby rules)
>Copland (1997)
>Wag the Dog (1997)
>Jackie Brown (1997)
>Ronin (1998)
>Analyze This (1999)
>Meet the Parents (2000)
>The Score (2001)
>
>After that, it goes downhill, but that's obviously a great
>run. I'd take that list over Pacino's post-70s output, to be
>honest.
>

a lot of these performances you mentioned aren't all that worthy of note. They're not bad, but they're nothing to use as proof.

>>* Doesn't phone it in as much as De Niro.
>
>Somewhat debatable. See the above list. Then add in everything
>from the 70s. That's over three decades of classics. He could
>have died or never made another movie after 2001 and he'd
>already be top five dead or alive. Point being, after all
>those years of churning out classics and working with serious
>directors, I don't really care that he phones it in for
>paychecks now.
>
>Let's not pretend that Al ain't doing the same shit.

There's no doubt that both of them cash in on their name, and there's no problem with that. But the question is about who's better between the two of them ('cause let's be fair, Hoffman's not walking into that room), and there's not much in your above list that proves his superior talent. There's nothing on that above list from '95 on that showcases his acting talent on a major level.

>>* Does more interesting stuff than Hoffman.
>>* Ever seen De Niro or Hoffman do Shakespeare? EXACTLY.
>
>Don't me wrong, Pacino is a fucking thespian, no doubt. I just
>don't think it's as clear cut as you're making it. (That being
>said, I think Pacino>De Niro in their scenes together in
>Heat.)
>
>The tie-breaker (in favor of De Niro) might be the fact that
>Pacino played female Adam Sander's love interest in Jack &
>Jill. There's just no coming back from that shit...

That Jack & Jill flick is weird.


"Your current frequencies of understanding outweigh that which has been given for you to understand." Saul Williams

:)

Also, maybe I meant "turn up the breakbeats really fucking loud!" i.e. "pump the breaks."

It wouldn't have made any fucking sense, but I could have meant that.

>* His post '70s career has been better than Hoffman and De
>Niro.

This is a baffling point to me. As I pointed out above, one could debate De Niro was *better* in the 80s than in the 70s: Pacino doesn't have a single performance after the 70s on par with Raging Bull... or maybe even King of Comedy. Or OUATIA. Or Goodfellas.

Pacino famously became the scream-and-spit actor he has remained to this day starting with Scarface and for damn near everything going forward from there. Sometimes, it's been used beautifully (Glengarry, Scent of a Woman), but often times it can be a little much, to put it mildly.

I'd agree that Pacino post 70s beats Hoffman post 70s, but again, one could argue that Tootsie and Death of a Salesman are just as good if not better performances than anything Pacino did post 70s. Not sure I'd make that argument, but I'd absolutely listen to it.

>* The only one to do film, television and theatre
>successfully.

This is blatantly false, as Hoffman is a heralded theatre actor, and Luck was a terrific TV series anchored by Hoffman's terrific performance.

>* Doesn't phone it in as much as De Niro.

De Niro and Pacino both started phoning it in and cashing checks around 2000, and De Niro works more often, so, sure, in that regard. But Pacino's percentage of phoned-in cinematic performances is probably just as high as De Niro's.

>* Does more interesting stuff than Hoffman.

After, say, 1985, no question, but before then, there's an easy argument to be made for Hoffman regarding range of material tackled.

>* Ever seen De Niro or Hoffman do Shakespeare? EXACTLY.

Hoffman received a Tony nomination for his performance in The Merchant of Venice-- something Pacino failed to do when he was on Broadway in the role.

If we're being honest, a lot of theater critics really don't like Pacino's scream-and-spit take on Shakespeare either-- they accuse him of just screaming the words and grunting and doing Pacino shtick instead of attempting to truly embody a character.

I really like Looking For Richard, but I don't think Pacino is necessarily a great Richard in the documentary. He fared somewhat better in The Merchant of Venice, because he toned back the screaming, but he still really cranks it up in an unsophisticated way at the end.

Overall, I can hear a case for Pacino or De Niro (and, if we're talking diverse skill set, for Hoffman)-- I just objected to the "obviousness" that you alluded to in your original post.

And it's breakfast time, and I'm bored.

I went with Hoffman today.

He just isnt on the same level as Pacino or De Niro.




**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

w.f.t.j.a.t.c.i.a.c.m.a.n.g.t.j.

I wonder why they didn't go four and add Jack to the list.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

Movies I need y'all bastids to see so we can discuss:

Five Star
Appropriate Behavior
Margaret