... does anybody know why?
All I've been able to find online are some references to quotes he ostensibly made referring to his regret at being involved with it. But I can't substantiate any of these quotes.
Anyone?
Bueller?
I heard the same spit. I also remember seeing quote where he said he hated doing & did it only because he was broke. But yeah, there's little support to go far on this quote.
shareThere's one line in the IN-LAWS DVD commentary, when Andrew Bergman says he didn't want to do a FREEBIE AND THE BEAN sequel, and Arkin says "I didn't want to do the first one." That's the extent of the evidence I can find, but I did hear that today while viewing. That's a lousy commentary, btw. A bunch of old guys, all capable of being very funny, being boring and polite with each other. Falk already showing evidence of dementia. Sad really. Movie holds up.
How's life in Liberal Central? Still kicking waif beggars in the bangs on the way to work?
Not 100% true. He's recently given an interview and they discussed the film when the reported mentioned this film was out on DVD. "The first time?" Arkin asked, apparently not knowing which of his films are available and which are not.
He says he has nightmares about the making of the film, but that he developed a very close friendship with Caan because of it.
His hatred is not the film itself, but the director. He and Caan found Rush to be foolhardy and would put actors in unnecessarily dangerous positions. He says it got the point where he and Caan simply did not trust Rush anymore, and instead grew closer for defense.
So apparently he doesn't hate the movie, just hated the conditions around making it.
Thanks very much, tester. That's excellent and helpful feedback.
May I ask: what was the venue for this interview, where did you see or hear it, and is it available to me?
On the flipside, Richard Rush has said that both Arkin and Caan were the most difficult actors he'd ever ever worked with, and that he was advised against hiring Arkin in the first place because of his reputation as a "director-killer" who'd given Mike Nichols a hard time during the "Catch-22" shoot. This comes from an interview in Shock Cinema magazine, #36.
share[deleted]
I'd go with what Rush said. I've heard of Arkin and Caan being difficult on other movies. In fact Arkin tried to get Robert Altman fired off of "M.A.S.H" cause he thought that Altman didn't have a clue of what he was doing! And Caan has always had a VERY bad temper which he seemingly doesn't control on sets.
shareI think it's a case of three men with egos. BUT, some of the things Rush had them do, could have easily got them hurt. I do believe the general consensus is that some actors DID get hurt on set because Rush didn't take proper precautions.
Anything Rush says after the fact could be nothing more than retaliation, though.
Alan Arkin tried to get Altman fired from MASH? Arkin wasn't in MASH? Why would he do that?
shareOOPS! Sorry. I got Elliott Gould mixed up with Arkin (for some reason). Gould and Sutherland hated "MASH" WHILE MAKING IT. They complained to executives that director Altman didn't know what he was doing and was going to ruin their careers. They *beep* up about it when the movie came out and was a big hit.
shareThis hardly surprises me. He was a complete miscast. Among the other flaw this movie has, Arkin is the worst of them all. His character is an all around mess.
'What has been affirmed without proof can also be denied without proof.' (Euclid)
"This hardly surprises me. He was a complete miscast. Among the other flaw this movie has, Arkin is the worst of them all. His character is an all around mess."
I disagree, I thought both Caan and Arkin played off each other beautifully. Sure they were nuts but thats what the movie's charm was all about. Out of every action comedy I have ever seen this one made me laugh the hardest. I dare say they had better chemestry than Gibson and Glover, but I'm not sure. It would have been great if they were able to make second one but I don't know how they would have been able to top this one. Too bad Caan and Arkin never stared together in another movie together.
Dr. Peter Venkman: NOBODY steps on a church in my town.
[deleted]
I met Alan Arkin in 1975, and at that time he referred to this movie as a "steaming pile of *bleep*". He said he took the part because it was the only one being offered to him at the time and he was trying to break his reputation of being on a high horse and not thinking the scripts being sent to him were worthy of his talent. He said if he had been offered ANY other movie at the same time he would have told Rush to go *bleep* himself. This no doubt added to his reputation of being a difficult actor to work with.
shareOut of all the movies I've seen from either of the two actors, this one is my personal favorite. I agree with a previous post that their chemistry rivals Gibson and Glover. If any movie deserved a sequal, this ones it. Too bad no one got along. The scenes where the two were talking about how suits are made and when Arkin was trying to tell off his wife were brillantly funny.
Dr. Peter Venkman: NOBODY steps on a church in my town.
The scene where Arkin "kills it" to me -- but totally in tandem with Caan -- is as they try to interact with their crazed DA boss, played by Alex Rocco.
Whether or not Arkin hated this movie, he gives his comic all to this scene, with his sudden vocal outbursts calming down to nervous quietude.
"Just wondering if...if we keep him alive til Monday, can we get something?"
"You trying to make a deal with me?"
"NO! NO! No deal! Not trying to make a deal. Oh, no. No. Just...we're just askin'...just askin' a question is all."
Arkin's vocal and facial playing here is great, and Caan plays right along with him, stepping on Arkin's lines and weaving in an out with his own protests.
Arkin just seemed fully on top of his game in that scene...if he hated the movie, still, he gave it his all.
He probably hates it because the movie is not very good
shareThat's what I was going to say-- even though I did find the movie enjoyable. But then, I think the movie is enjoyable because of Arkin and Caan's chemistry, which elevated a pretty haphazard script. Take them out and I'm not sure the movie would be the cult hit it still is.
At the very least, he was professional enough to not phone his performance in.