MovieChat Forums > ...And Justice for All (1979) Discussion > This Movie Derailed Al Pacino's Career

This Movie Derailed Al Pacino's Career

posted 15 years ago by jonchopwood
25 replies | jump to latest

I always felt that it was this movie, not "Cruising" (let's forget the egregious ("Author! Author!") that derailed Al Pacino's career in the 1980s. I mean, all that is bad about Al Pacino is on prominent display here. Beside the BIG HAIR he still wears, now dyed (making himself look ridiculous), his BIG ACTING was so over the top as to be ludicrous.

The fact that he got an unjustified Oscar nomination or this (if one racked up all the bad Oscar noms through history, one would have a list at least half as long as the total of all noms)...well.... He must have looked at himself, and known that he had hoodwinked everybody...but himself. He must have known this was a piece of Ess Aitsch Eye Tee. However, that didn't prevent him from giving the worst performance by a respected major actor four years later with "Scarface."

Pacino was serious about acting, and this wasn't acting, this was yelling. This was overacting, and scenery chewing at a level never seen before in a major motion picture since the early talkies.

He must have been supremely embarassed, at the core of his being, by this performance. And I'm sure that's why he acted so infrequently, on film, through the following decade, as he was trying to get his bearings again.

"Why do people always laugh in the wrong places?"
-- Jack Nicholson

[–] JoeLoebner 15 years ago

YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER! YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER!

[–] dudleynomore 15 years ago

It's stage acting, baby. Al Pacino has returned repeatedly to the stage throughout his career, and a 'big' performance is exactly what works best in that setting. He just forgot the footlights were switched off for some scenes in this one. Re-watch the shouty parts with that in mind and you'll figure out why he deserved the nomination.

And lol you suck, etc.

[–] Paul_Ke 15 years ago

Disagree. The movie "Revolution" was the movie that derailed Pacino's career. Fortunately, it was temporary. He got back on track with "Sea of Love"

[–] sliptdisk 15 years ago

Now, THAT'S the truth. His career was fine after AJFA. He got nominated and should have won. The OP is just plain wrong on this one. And, if I recall, he temporarily stopped making movies after Revolution, making what was hailed as his comeback in Sea Of Love.

Action is the enemy of thought.

[–] franzkabuki 15 years ago

His performance in AJFA a relatively mediocre one - but this only compared to his previous seventies work which had been quite simply amazing (with the possible/probable exception of Bobby Deerfield which I haven´t seen). I mean, it obviously cannot be very easy to always maintain the level of Michael Corleone, Frank Serpico or Sonny Wortzik - just to name three of gallery - now can it? His Arthur here is in deed a little uneven, as if not really sure how much vulnerability to inject to the character and sometimes the screaming also seems to come on a wrong cue... and ESPECIALLY his helicopter freakout was not very convincing at all. These are mainly minor missteps, but they do manage to soil the rug to some extent. Mostly he´s very solid though and there are many scenes that he pulls off amazingly.

The bashing of Tony Montana is totally off though - it´s one of his best performances and surely the best by any leading actor in any film in 1983 that I have seen. Sure he was over the top, but that was exactly the right place to be in a film blown up to operatic proportions. It´s totally in sync with the visual style and themes of the picture. And it´s always totally grounded in real emotion, however exaggerated it may be. It´s the ultimate coke movie for one thing - and that´s how things must look on top of the snowy mountain ranges...

[–] ManBehindTheMask63 15 years ago

Cruising started his downfall. Plain and simple. The OP is a dbag. Pacino was nominated for god's sake!!! His performance was great.

"Hot Cocoa won't help, Mom!"-Charlie~FRIGHT NIGHT

[–] sliptdisk 15 years ago

How eloquently put. @@

Action is the enemy of thought.

[–] jrs-8 15 years ago

Actually I think BOBBY DEERFIELD was the beginning of the downslide for Pacino. It was a sappy, poorly conceived love story that bombed at the box office - his first. Then he followed it with AND JUSTICE FOR ALL, CRUISING, AUTHOR AUTHOR, SCARFACE and REVOLUTION. All of them were poorly received by critics and none were certified hits though Scarface didn't do badly.

[–] tom-1674 8 years ago

Scarface was a massive hit.

[–] christomacin (4529) 3 years ago

For an R-rated, nearly 3-hour downbeat movie circa 1983 it did pretty well

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] VirginOnPromNight 15 years ago

yea, it 'derailed' his career. he went on to to that horrible SCARFACE , which is one of the most talked about, admired movies of all time. not to mention all the t-shirts and memoribilia that is now being sold ir record numbers to minorities , and a few white boys who love the movie. in case you havent figured it out, im being sarcastic. tony montana is a household name. can you give any examples of another character whose name is known by everyone, besides Rocky or Michael Corleone (also a Pacino character) . gee, this is an easy argument

[–] netshopper-2 15 years ago

All the characters in the film were over the top and theatrical so what's the big deal? Not all of us want to see method acting all the time with its so called subtleties where the actors seem tranquilized.

[–] montrossboc-1 8 years ago

You think Dr. Hannibal Lecter, Indiana Jones and Spider-Man, etc. aren't in the running?

Short Cut, Draw Blood

[–] christomacin (4529) 3 years ago

Scarface did well considering it was R-rated, very long, and very controversial, but it got burned by the critics and didn't really boost his standing all that much.

[–] pawtrax67 15 years ago

You're freaking out of your mind if you think this movie derailed his career.

[–] cestlasabrina 15 years ago

I think that this was the strongest performance of his career. The OP needs to understand that, stylistically, what we consider great acting now and what we considered great acting in the past has changed a great deal. Since most actors before Gen X and Gen Y came from the stage, it was natural that they carried their expertise with him. Al was probably taught a few things from Strasberg that some people might consider over-the-top and cheesy today, but I thought he walked that line as gracefully as it could be walked. He played a character in a dire position, suffering a mental and emotional breakdown, and I felt like what he brought to those moments of pure desperation was so pure and honest that, method or not, he was 100% brilliant. This was the movie that made me a fan.

[–] KayDrama 10 years ago

Totally agree with this:

The OP needs to understand that, stylistically, what we consider great acting now and what we considered great acting in the past has changed a great deal.

Since I saw this movie in 1979, it had been one of my favorite movies and performances by Al Pacino and by any actor. However, when I saw it again just a few years ago, it did seem over the top, lacking nuances, even the final scene which I always remembered as a rallying cry against injustice. Perhaps it has been quoted and parodied too often. But I do remember how it made me feel at the time of its original release and I try to view it remembering where it stood in my eyes then as opposed to the standard of acting we have now.

Shoot, who's to say that our lack of empathy/reaction to his closing statement is because the atrocities in the movie are no longer as shocking as they were then? If we could be brought to the same sense of outrage that Pacino's character is up against (but we've since seen so much real life news like school shootings, etc., that the events in the movie (although realistic and happening every day) make us shake our heads but not much more). If we could go back to a bit more innocent time like 1979 and experience the righteous outrage to the injustice in the movie, then perhaps Pacino's performance would strike just the right note, again.

[–] Howlin Wolf 15 years ago

It's only possible to make the statement in your subject line if one ignores Cruising, Author, Author! & Revolution; 3 films that all came AFTER this one.

His 'big acting' was in a whole 'nother galaxy, but that's what makes Pacino so watchable to me; he has passion oozing from his pores... His shouty, 'force of nature' performances may have killed his career, had he not also proved his ability to stay at the other extreme and do quiet, brooding performances as well.

People can criticise his style and technique all they want, but there are none more fascinating onscreen, for my money.

However, that didn't prevent him from giving the worst performance by a respected major actor four years later with "Scarface."

It's iconic for the right reasons.

And I'm sure that's why he acted so infrequently, on film, through the following decade, as he was trying to get his bearings again.

... Telling that it took three roles that were all MUCH worse than this one to do it! Unfairly making this film the focus of your ire plays much more controversially as a talking point than actually taking notice of the chronology and reaching the conclusion that the evidence suggests.

Do you like having sex? Then DON'T buy a Nintendo!

[–] AnotherSchmoe 14 years ago

I just watched this movie for the first time, thought it was great! Not sure what you're talking about OP, Pacino was great in this film, really good movie. And it's not like his career went crap after it, he did plenty of great movies afterwards, one I also recently watched (Carlito's Way 1993, fantastic movie IMO). Sure he's done some stinkers like 88 Minutes but don't exaggerate and act like he doesn't do any good work. If you just personally dislike the man then that's fine, but don't spew crap about him.

[–] marveliar 14 years ago

not sure what the OP's talking about either...i mean, at some point, ha has so little argument (that some other posters fought easily) that i think he's totally lying and wrote this post just to p!ss the fans off so he'd get them to reply.

honestly, i think he was just trolling.

[–] asgard-5 11 years ago

I don't think this movie hurt his career. Pacino's style of acting simply doesn't fit many movies that he did. By the way, this film looks so much like Cruising (or vice versa) I expected the leatherclad killer to walk into the frame.

[–] montrossboc-1 11 years ago

I enjoyed Author, Author. Nice change of pace

Short Cut, Draw Blood.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]