Author Topic: Coppola unloads on Pacino, De Niro, and Jack (Read 4303 times)

Phoenix Dark · « **on:** October 18, 2007, 02:18:55 AM »

Quote

Film director Francis Ford Coppola has attacked three of the biggest stars in Hollywood, denouncing them for being lazy and uninterested in taking risks.
Coppola told GQ magazine that Al Pacino and Robert De Niro - both in his Godfather trilogy - and Jack Nicholson had been spoilt by success and lost the fire that had made them raging bulls.

"I met both Pacino and De Niro when they were really on the come," he said. "They were young and insecure. Now Pacino is very rich, maybe because he never spends any money; he just puts it in his mattress. De Niro was deeply inspired by Zoetrope [Coppola's studio] and created an empire and is wealthy and powerful. Nicholson was - when I met him and worked with him - he was always kind of a joker. He's got a little bit of a mean streak. He's intelligent, always wired in with the big guys and the big bosses of the studios. I don't know what any of them want any more ... Pacino always wanted to do theatre ... [He] will say, 'Oh, I was raised next to a furnace in New York, and I'm never going to go to LA,' but they all live off the fat of the land."

Coppola's own career has been largely dormant since finishing the Godfather trilogy in 1990. He has a new film, Youth Without Youth, due out this year but has spent much of the intervening time concentrating on his California vineyard and a luxury resort he owns in Belize.
He said that the stars had been eclipsed by younger actors. "A guy like [Spaniard] Javier Bardem is excited to do something good: 'Let me do this' or 'I'll put stuff in my mouth, change my appearance.' I don't feel that kind of passion to do a role and be great coming from those guys ...

"I think if there was a role that De Niro was hungry for, he would come after it. I don't think Jack would. Jack has money and influence and girls, and I think he's a little bit like Brando, except Brando went through some tough times."

http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2193332,00.html

Ichirou · « **Reply #1 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:31:50 AM »

He's right on the mark, though. Takes guts to say those things, especially considering how big those three guys are.

TVC15 · « **Reply #2 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:32:29 AM »

Coppola has the name and the rep, and he's done a lot for up and comers, but bitch really shouldn't be questioning peoples' careers. He hasn't made a worthwhile movie since like the early 80s. Pacino and De Niro have been hit or miss since the early 80s, but at least they have done some good and great work.

Nicholson? Who the fuck does Coppola think he is? Nicholson still does killer roles. If Nicholson shows up to do a movie today, chances are he's going to fucking rule in it. Maybe he doesn't work as often, but gee, dude has been acting since the FUCKING 50s. Gee, Coppola, maybe after a HALF CENTURY of acting, you want to slow down a bit and not be in movies every year?

Coppola could get fucked. Asshole should caligula himself for giving birth to one of the biggest hacks out there, too.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #3 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:38:36 AM »

Quote from: TVC 15 on October 18, 2007, 02:32:29 AM

Coppola has the name and the rep, and he's done a lot for up and comers, but bitch really shouldn't be questioning peoples' careers. He hasn't made a worthwhile movie since like the early 80s. Pacino and De Niro have been hit or miss since the early 80s, but at least they have done some good and great work.

Nicholson? Who the fuck does Coppola think he is? Nicholson still does killer roles. If Nicholson shows up to do a movie today, chances are he's going to fucking rule in it. Maybe he doesn't work as often, but gee, dude has been acting since the FUCKING 50s. Gee, Coppola, maybe after a HALF CENTURY of acting, you want to slow down a bit and not be in movies every year?

Coppola could get fucked. Asshole should caligula himself for giving birth to one of the biggest hacks out there, too.

I agree. This reaks of extreme pot-calling-kettle-black syndrome.

Godfather: 10/10
Apocalypse Now: 9.5/10
Dracula: 7/10 (i like it don't shit on me plz)

TVC15 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:41:23 AM »

I got Dracula on Blu Ray the other day. I mainly got it because it's a very good looking movie, probably a good HD showoff piece. I am kind of fond of it because it came out when I was like 12, so it was like the coolest thing ever back then. Now, well, it has Tom Waits, but it has A LOT of terrible acting. That might be Keanu Reeves' worst performance. *That* is saying something.

Oh, Tom Waits AND Gary Oldman. Gary Oldman is a total badass like 120% of the time.

Ichirou · « **Reply #5 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:42:16 AM »

Quote from: TVC 15 on October 18, 2007, 02:32:29 AM

Coppola has the name and the rep, and he's done a lot for up and comers, but bitch really shouldn't be questioning peoples' careers. He hasn't made a worthwhile movie since like the early 80s. Pacino and De Niro have been hit or miss since the early 80s, but at least they have done some good and great work.

Nicholson? Who the fuck does Coppola think he is? Nicholson still does killer roles. If Nicholson shows up to do a movie today, chances are he's going to fucking rule in it. Maybe he doesn't work as often, but gee, dude has been acting since the FUCKING 50s. Gee, Coppola, maybe after a HALF CENTURY of acting, you want to slow down a bit and not be in movies every year?

Coppola could get fucked. Asshole should caligula himself for giving birth to one of the biggest hacks out there, too.

He's basically saying they don't have the fire they used to...which is true. The same is true of him, but whatever, man. You can be an asshole and call other people assholes...the source doesn't make it any less true! And this is coming from someone who thinks Coppola's output after the seventies is totally pathetic (yes, including the ridiculous One From The Heart - sorry Tom Waits!)

And don't compare '70s Nicholson with present-day Nicholson, who's basically a caricature of who he used to be.

You can say the same for all the big names; Dustin Hoffman is another dude who has fallen off HARD.

TVC15 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:46:02 AM »

Nicholson does a movie like once every 3 years now. Frankly, he could have retired after the 70s, done NOTHING up until today, and he'd still rank highly in my books. Much like De Niro and Pacino, he basically plays himself these days, for the most part, but unlike De Niro and Pacino, Nicholson is a legit badass, so playing himself is cool by me. I mean, Roman Polanski raped that bitch at his place. That is badassery.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #7 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:49:30 AM »

I went into my viewing of Dracula after hearing two opposite views on it; my mom said it was the best Dracula movie ever, while my brother said it was one of the worse movies ever. For the first 20-30 minutes I thought my brother was right. The prologue is just too crazy and theatrical, while many of the costumes just look horrible due to the surreal color. Reeves certainly doesn't make things better; I wish he stayed in the castle getting sucked off

But there's a point in the film where everything just seems to click and you're left on the edge of your seat. Once all the major players are established and start chasing Dracula I forgot about the shitty prologue and bad acting. Overall I'd give it a 7

Ichirou · « **Reply #8 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:54:23 AM »

Tom Waits's performance as Renfield MAKES that movie.

TVC15 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:55:12 AM »

Tom Waits is kind of a good actor in most of the stuff I have seen him in. I am somewhat surprised he never tried to make a career out of that.

bud · « **Reply #10 on:** October 18, 2007, 06:15:41 AM »

coppola has made four of the greatest movies i've ever seen: the godfather part i, the godfather part ii, the conversation, and apocalypse now. all these movies were made 70's and he hasn't really made anything worthwile after that.

however, youth without youth does look awesome, from what i've seen of it, and it could be better than everything he's done after apocalypse now, but that isn't really saying much.

Solo · « **Reply #11 on:** October 18, 2007, 07:20:50 AM »

Theres a lot of truth in what he says, but in reality, it comes off sounding like a man who hasnt made a decent movie in several decade, and who probably couldnt get any of those 3 to star in a movie of his now.

Basically, sour grapes.

Gay Boy · « **Reply #12 on:** October 18, 2007, 08:17:55 AM »

I am really hoping for the best with youth without youth. I think it sounds very good. I would love to see him get back on track while he is still "young" enough to pump out movies.

Bloodwake · « **Reply #13 on:** October 18, 2007, 10:03:43 AM »

Quote from: Solo on October 18, 2007, 07:20:50 AM

Theres a lot of truth in what he says, but in reality, it comes off sounding like a man who hasnt made a decent movie in several decade, and who probably couldnt get any of those 3 to star in a movie of his now.

Basically, sour grapes.

Yeah, basically.

Out of those three names, I would only say that MAYBE Pacino is accurate. In the cases of De Niro and Nicholson, they've done so many great roles throughout the seventies that they deserve a chance to take it easy.

bud · « **Reply #14 on:** October 18, 2007, 10:06:32 AM »

Quote from: Bloodwake on October 18, 2007, 10:03:43 AM

Quote from: Solo on October 18, 2007, 07:20:50 AM
Theres a lot of truth in what he says, but in reality, it comes off sounding like a man who hasnt made a decent movie in several decade, and who probably couldnt get any of those 3 to star in a movie of his now.

Basically, sour grapes.

Yeah, basically.

Out of those three names, I would only say that MAYBE Pacino is accurate. In the cases of De Niro and Nicholson, they've done so many great roles throughout the seventies that they deserve a chance to take it easy.

wtf

deniro is the worst of the three while the other two are actually still acting nowadays.

edit: pacino in the 70's

Bloodwake · « **Reply #15 on:** October 18, 2007, 10:11:06 AM »

Quote from: bud on October 18, 2007, 10:06:32 AM

Quote from: Bloodwake on October 18, 2007, 10:03:43 AM
Quote from: Solo on October 18, 2007, 07:20:50 AM
Theres a lot of truth in what he says, but in reality, it comes off sounding like a man who hasnt made a decent movie in several decade, and who probably couldnt get any of those 3 to star in a movie of his now.

Basically, sour grapes.

Yeah, basically.

Out of those three names, I would only say that MAYBE Pacino is accurate. In the cases of De Niro and Nicholson, they've done so many great roles throughout the seventies that they deserve a chance to take it easy.

wtf

deniro is the worst of the three while the other two are actually still acting nowadays.

Wasn't De Niro in Stardust? Wasn't that released this year?

And I can think of a lot more awesome roles De Niro was in than Pacino, even though they are both awesome.

Solo · « **Reply #16 on:** October 18, 2007, 01:51:46 PM »

My usual stance on Pacino and De Niro: Pacino has had a more consistent, better career, but De Niro has had the better single performances. Although Pacino comes pretty darn close to having the better career AND better single performances.

Gay Boy · « **Reply #17 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:15:48 PM »

Quote from: Bloodwake on October 18, 2007, 10:11:06 AM

Quote from: bud on October 18, 2007, 10:06:32 AM
Quote from: Bloodwake on October 18, 2007, 10:03:43 AM
Quote from: Solo on October 18, 2007, 07:20:50 AM
Theres a lot of truth in what he says, but in reality, it comes off sounding like a man who hasnt made a decent movie in several decade, and who probably couldnt get any of those 3 to star in a movie of his now.

Basically, sour grapes.

Yeah, basically.

Out of those three names, I would only say that MAYBE Pacino is accurate. In the cases of De Niro and Nicholson, they've done so many great roles throughout the seventies that they deserve a chance to take it easy.

wtf

deniro is the worst of the three while the other two are actually still acting nowadays.

Wasn't De Niro in Stardust? Wasn't that released this year?

And I can think of a lot more awesome roles De Niro was in than Pacino, even though they are both awesome.

Stardust was one of the years best movies and De Niro gave a fantastic performance in it.

bud · « **Reply #18 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:19:45 PM »

let's say that movie is good, just like his performance in it--i haven't seen it yet--then that's like the first deniro-movie in almost 10 years that was worth watching --ronin omg-- whereas pacino has done some awesome stuff in the last couple of years and, thus, has been far more consistent.

TVC15 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:22:44 PM »

Now now, boys, both De Niro and Pacino are terrible. I say De Niro gets slightly more credit because he was never in anything as wretched as Scarface.

Jack is the only unimpeachable of the three.

bud · « **Reply #20 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:38:27 PM »

post '98: stiller > deniro

it's true, guys. $:-\$

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #21 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:39:57 PM »

[youtube=425,350]1piB0xIkvUU[/youtube]
De Niro's best film of the last 10 years

bud · « **Reply #22 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:43:01 PM »

that was 11 years ago

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #23 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:45:31 PM »

best film in 11 years confirmed

Solo · « **Reply #24 on:** October 18, 2007, 02:49:35 PM »

Quote from: TVC 15 on October 18, 2007, 02:22:44 PM

Now now, boys, both De Niro and Pacino are terrible. I say De Niro gets slightly more credit because he was never in anything as wretched as Scarface.

Jack is the only unimpeachable of the three.

De Niro was in Rocky and Bullwinkle, the Parents movies, the Analyze movies, Hide and Seek, shall I keep going?

All three have done their fair share of shit. Yes, Jack too.

AdmiralViscen · « **Reply #25 on:** October 18, 2007, 03:08:07 PM »

Fuck him. Maybe if they'd starred in the all-time classic Jack he would shut the fuck up.

Seems really out of place, Nicholson's done pretty consistently good movies and the other two have been picking up their game lately.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #26 on:** October 18, 2007, 03:13:25 PM »

Jack was in the fucking DEPARTED last year. He's much better than the other two, in recent years

bud · « **Reply #27 on:** October 18, 2007, 03:22:22 PM »

the insider > the departed

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #28 on:** October 18, 2007, 03:24:14 PM »

never seen it. who directed

bud · « **Reply #29 on:** October 18, 2007, 03:25:21 PM »

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #30 on:** October 18, 2007, 03:34:03 PM »

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/insider/

TVC15 · « **Reply #31 on:** October 18, 2007, 04:14:40 PM »

Quote from: Solo on October 18, 2007, 02:49:35 PM

Quote from: TVC 15 on October 18, 2007, 02:22:44 PM
Now now, boys, both De Niro and Pacino are terrible. I say De Niro gets slightly more credit because he was never in anything as wretched as Scarface.

Jack is the only unimpeachable of the three.

De Niro was in Rocky and Bullwinkle, the Parents movies, the Analyze movies, Hide and Seek, shall I keep going?

All three have done their fair share of shit. Yes, Jack too.

Jack's been in substantially less shit than either of the others. And Rocky and Bullwinkle is better than Scarface. Never seen the Parents movies as I have an aversion to Ben Stiller.

bluemax · « **Reply #32 on:** October 18, 2007, 05:24:28 PM »

Quote from: TVC 15 on October 18, 2007, 02:41:23 AM

I got Dracula on Blu Ray the other day. I mainly got it because it's a very good looking movie, probably a good HD showoff piece. I am kind of fond of it because it came out when I was like 12, so it was like the coolest thing ever back then. Now, well, it has Tom Waits, but it has A LOT of terrible acting. That might be Keanu Reeves' worst performance. *That* is saying something.

Oh, Tom Waits AND Gary Oldman. Gary Oldman is a total badass like 120% of the time.

I watched Dracula a couple months ago for the first time ever. Holy shit what a laughably bad movie. I asked my GF if it was intentionally supposed to be that cheesy and she got mad at me. I had to bite my tongue and not make MST3K style jokes the whole time.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #33 on:** October 18, 2007, 05:25:38 PM »

Quote from: TVC 15 on October 18, 2007, 04:14:40 PM

Quote from: Solo on October 18, 2007, 02:49:35 PM
Quote from: TVC 15 on October 18, 2007, 02:22:44 PM
Now now, boys, both De Niro and Pacino are terrible. I say De Niro gets slightly more credit because he was never in anything as wretched as Scarface.

Jack is the only unimpeachable of the three.

De Niro was in Rocky and Bullwinkle, the Parents movies, the Analyze movies, Hide and Seek, shall I keep going?

All three have done their fair share of shit. Yes, Jack too.

Jack's been in substantially less shit than either of the others. And Rocky and Bullwinkle is better than Scarface. Never seen the Parents movies as I have an aversion to Ben Stiller.

why do you hate scarface so much? do you find sexual satisfaction with hurting african american male's feelings? $:-\$

TVC15 · « **Reply #34 on:** October 18, 2007, 05:26:30 PM »

I hate to tell you this, PD, but Pacino wasn't black in Scarface. He was a Mexican or something.

Also, if you pee in a girl, you won't have asian babies. Just wanted to let you know that because maybe they didn't cover that in school.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #35 on:** October 18, 2007, 05:33:13 PM »

Many blacks like Scarface because it's a story about going from nothing to something - it transcends race. I'm not saying it's the greatest thing since gangbangs, but it's definitely an entertaining crime film.

why do you hate it? :'(

TVC15 · « **Reply #36 on:** October 18, 2007, 05:36:44 PM »

Why do many blacks have to pick something so crass as the inspirational story of going from nothing to something?

And might I add that he ends up returning to nothing in the end.

And I hate it because it's a terrible fucking movie.

Gay Boy · « **Reply #37 on:** October 18, 2007, 05:37:33 PM »

PD it doesn't transcend race. Most white guys I know thinks its meh to shitty.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #38 on:** October 18, 2007, 05:40:50 PM »

I dunno. Lots of people feel like they're oppressed, have to do "whatever is necessary" to survive, hustle, etc. I find all my inspiration in films like Hoosiers and Forrest Gump, but my black brethren have a different mindset.

but why do you hate it? the script wasn't bad, and pacino's acting was over the top but good. outside of it looking VERY dated today, i can't think of many complaints. it's a fun 8/10 type movie to me

Quote from: Cheebs

PD it doesn't transcend race. Most white guys I know thinks its meh to shitty.

Well I guess you guys haven't done much struggling have you

spoiler (click to show/hide)

i'm sorry I couldn't resist. j/k

[close]

AdmiralViscen · « **Reply #39 on:** October 18, 2007, 06:30:44 PM »

Maybe in 20 years all blacks will idolize Maximus and wear Gladiator jackets.

BobbyRobby · « **Reply #40 on:** October 18, 2007, 06:42:50 PM »

Pacino was in Gigli

recursivelyenumerable · « **Reply #41 on:** October 18, 2007, 07:06:11 PM »

Quote

Asshole should caligula himself for giving birth to one of the biggest hacks out there, too.

at first I thought you meant George Lucas.

Gay Boy · « **Reply #42 on:** October 18, 2007, 07:13:03 PM »

[youtube=425,350]zqHfser_9_s[/youtube]
.

Bloodwake · « **Reply #43 on:** October 18, 2007, 07:17:36 PM »

I enjoyed Scarface, but it isn't a masterpiece or anything.

Solo · « **Reply #44 on:** October 19, 2007, 08:14:49 AM »

Quote from: TVC 15 on October 18, 2007, 04:14:40 PM

Jack's been in substantially less shit than either of the others.

This at least is true.

drohne · « **Reply #45 on:** October 19, 2007, 10:52:13 AM »

scarface is fucking hilarious. even if it was nothing but the 'push it to the limit' montage and pacino saying 'her womb is so polluted she can't even have a little fuckin baby' it'd be a classic...of sorts. it's one of the best bad performances ever.

[youtube=425,350]SO5eKEYuuUQ[/youtube]

bud · « **Reply #46 on:** October 19, 2007, 11:46:05 AM »

i remember when i used listen to that 50 second ''push it to the limit'' chorus .wav file all day long.

awesome song

Stocky · « **Reply #47 on:** October 19, 2007, 12:06:35 PM »

Serpico

Raging Bull

Chinatown

TVC15 · « **Reply #48 on:** October 19, 2007, 01:02:10 PM »

It's funny watching the Vinent Price movis with young Jack Nicholson. I think he is in more that one. Anyway, the one I remember mose is The Raven (I think?). Jack Nicholson had on this tight actor's tights, and there was some scene where he was either crawling in a small space, or climbing up a ladder. The camera got behind him at a very wrong, perhaps very right angle, and Jack's entighted junk was right there for all to see. It was so awesome.

AdmiralViscen · « **Reply #49 on:** October 19, 2007, 01:03:58 PM »

Quote from: Gay Boy on October 18, 2007, 07:13:03 PM

[youtube=425,350]zqHfser_9_s[/youtube]
.

A good source of riboflavin

It just gets better and better

Gay Boy · « **Reply #50 on:** October 19, 2007, 01:09:08 PM »

De Niro doing the Elmo laugh at the end is CREEEEPY

AdmiralViscen · « **Reply #51 on:** October 19, 2007, 01:09:32 PM »

Yes it is. Over and over again.

Bloodwake · « **Reply #52 on:** October 19, 2007, 05:58:45 PM »

Wow, that's fucked up.

Especially since he referenced two of his best, but obviously R rated roles on Sesame Street

News:

Author Topic: Coppola unloads on Pacino, De Niro, and Jack (Read 4303 times)