Why was de Niro here?
-
-
drew1116 — 9 years ago(July 04, 2016 08:35 PM)
I'm just clarifying that I didn't think he was amazing or particularly important. There's just nothing to the character for someone of his ability to make his own.
I also think fans get caught up in an actor's work, thinking everything they do is brilliant or amazing. Sometimes, they just mail it in. Frankly, I don't know why De Niro accepted this role. He must have taken a pay cut and had recently done Heat and Copland, both fine performances in my opinion. Ronan was just around the corner as well. -
taran-rod — 9 years ago(July 05, 2016 10:41 AM)
"I also think fans get caught up in an actor's work, thinking everything they do is brilliant or amazing."
Even though I'm indeed a huge fan, I'm far from thinking that everything he does is amazing. But, his performance in Jackie Brown was amazing in my eyes. He was outstanding in Heat, decent in CopLand but in this movie it's Stallone who really impressed me. -
drew1116 — 9 years ago(July 05, 2016 10:00 PM)
Agreed on that one. Stallone was the best part of CopLand and that is saying something given some of the other fine performances. The only reason I mentioned those films is that he was still doing some good work.
Al Pacino on the other hand has been doing some real garbage for a long time and his over the top theatrics have been laughable for thirty years now. Also, his voice changed somehow. It seemed much higher in pitch in the seventies. -
franzkabuki — 9 years ago(August 25, 2016 10:52 AM)
"Anyone could play it".
Not too many as well as him. De Niro was quite wonderfully hilarious here; probably his last truly excellent performance - as well as one of his most unusual ones.
"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan -
striker90210 — 9 years ago(August 06, 2016 04:29 PM)
Of all the actors they could have chosen to play such small unimportant role, they chose de Niro. He does a good job. But come on, it's beep de Niro!
This is an old interview with Tarantino. The same question was asked and here is his answer. It starts at 12:50 minutes. First the age of the character. Second, a different role that is not about cool dialogue but it is about body language.
"This is a mission, not a fancy dress ball !!" -
dhmason6155 — 9 years ago(August 12, 2016 11:52 AM)
He seems to take anything that's offered to him (Rocky and Bullwinkle?!) basically out of boredom, although he also plays mild mannered beta-males (What Just Happened, Mad Dog and Glory, The Intern) as well as powerful alpha males (Goodfellas). Maybe he's seeking some kind of balance.
We got a job.
What kind?
The Forever Kind. -
DracTarashV — 9 years ago(August 15, 2016 09:45 PM)
His sex scene with Fonda is a masterpiece, and that's all that matters.
Jokes aside, De Niro is in this movie because he actually wanted the role of Max Cherry but Tarantino already had Robert Forster in mind for that role, so De Niro ended up with a smaller but no less memorable part. His casting as Louis was perfection.
You want something corny? You got it! -
dhmason6155 — 9 years ago(September 10, 2016 01:56 PM)
De Niro and Samuel Jackson were the most exciting actors, and the standouts in an otherwise marginal movie. This is regarded as one of Tarantino's weaker films.
I think this is the only movie that Tarantino didn't write and it showed. It's obvious to me that he had a hard time interpreting a book, and hence a different set of influences and ideas than his own.
But his "Guns and Babes" sales video was awesome!
We got a job.
What kind?
The Forever Kind.