MovieChat Forums > Down by Law (1986) Discussion > What do you think of the acting?

What do you think of the acting?

posted 18 years ago by wanbaclone
35 replies | jump to latest

I have to say, it was really tough for me to watch this movie. I just couldn't get over (what seemed to me) to be wooden acting by Lurie and Waits. Their movements specifically seemed awkward, but also Lurie's delivery of his lines; Waits' gravely voice however is at least enjoyable to listen to.

Note: My grievance has nothing to do with Jarmusch directing style. I particularly love his film Night on Earth.

I had a false view of...women. I thought of them as wearing invisible halos, not commiting mayhem.

[–] little_drop_of_poison 18 years ago

Maybe Tom looked a little more shy and nervous as Zack was supposed to be, but awkward, embarrassing scenes like that is pretty common in Jarmusch movies.
Can't really say anything bad about Lurie performance, except that Benigni is better actor.

[–] zxzxzxOO 18 years ago

Pretty impressive imo. Really long scenes without changing camera. (Dont remember what thats called)

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pubhouse3 18 years ago

Waits and Lurie are principally musicians, used by Jarmusch as actors. I think they are both well cast for a Jarmusch movie, dead-pan is his thing and it makes everything a lot more realistic. I doubt if you were drunk, then in prison, then on the run for the law, that you would be acting like Kenneth Branner. Meaning acting as in your actions not acting a part.

[–] dave-greg 18 years ago

I thought the guy who 'set up' Laurie was the worst actor in the film, really hammy. Some of the earlier scenes i thought Waits was trying too hard to look dark and moody. Once Benigni entered the film everything was ok.

'i'd rather stay here in my room, nothing out there but sin and gloom'

[–] cuilontli 18 years ago

Lurie and Waits are just fine: good, natural performances. I wanted to know a lot more about them. Benigni - as in all his films - puts the kiss of death on the whole thing; he's about as subtle as Jerry Lewis in the 1950s.

[–] DrSamba 13 years ago

That would explain why the French love Benigni! :-)

[–] satanetto 9 years ago

Benigni is also a non-actor, he plays himself in all his movies. Well maybe he overacts himself a bit. I think that a lot of the fun of this movie comes from the contrast between the two wannabe dark heroes who are too cool to shake hands, and the careless clown. But the three of them are mostly playing themselves. Btw this is from the "golden age" of Benigni, before he became a commercial phenomenon with "Il Mostro". He was way funnier and smarter back then. My favorite is "Berlinguer ti voglio bene", which is afaik unaccessible to non-italian speakers (no subtitles).

[–] cirrhosis31 18 years ago

That's Rockets Redglare! Man, you can't talk that way about Rockets Redglare!

[–] jamiemorrison20 16 years ago

Hear hear!

Rockets was a legend, not to mention possessor of a largely untapped genius.

[–] Sir_slide 17 years ago

the thing you also must understand about john lurie and tom waits, is that they are pretty much playing themselves...thats why its so good. If youve ever seen interviews with either of the two, thats what you get, especially waits.....this is what makes their "acting" so brilliant. see lurie in paris texas and also fishing with john and youll understand what i mean.

[–] Sotirios_V 18 years ago

As others wrote, Waits and Lurie are musicians and not actors. My opinion though is that they portrayed Jarmusch's characters really well. Lurie's appearance convinced me and Tom Waits brought to my mind some characters on his songs (self-destructive, drunks, abusive from time to time - see Franks Wild Years for example). As for Roberto, I highly respect him and i think that he's one of the most talented actors alive.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] explainmyself 18 years ago

Yeah, it was pretty bad... Same with Stranger Than Paradise. Somehow the bad acting adds flavor, though.

[–] pununintended 17 years ago

I don't like the word 'acting'.
They were excellent, they just didn't act. There is nothing worse than actors that start to act or over-act, respectively. That just makes you feel that it is a film.
I think it is quite obvious that you don't behave exhilarated but rather phlegmatic and awkward when you spend day after day in a nasty prison.

Vast better performances in that film than in any given Hollywood movie from American Beauty over Monster's Ball (Halle Berry, awful!!) to Mystic River. (Those 3 for ex. are so far away from even imitating authenticity.)

[–] thecultofhorror 17 years ago

i disagree with the original poster. i think the acting was great, especially since alot of the prison scenes were long takes. which shows talent on jarmusch's part and the actors as well.

[–] mustafatanyer 17 years ago

i think lurie and waits were good enough but they seemed bad because benigni was perfect. very impressive

[–] Jabbapop 17 years ago

i felt like lurie wasn't confident, which is strange as he's playing a pimp, a kind of hustler. he speaks his lines too softly and with a cadence which suggests he'd rather be doing something else. especially the scene where he's "recruiting" who he thinks is a prostitute. i felt like his character had never done this before, which doesn't make sense. his hand gestures throughout were just throwaways.

[–] satanetto 9 years ago

I think it makes perfect sense, we get to know it from his first dialog with his companion/protegé, his character is a loser who is trying to pretend to be a super cool gangster, but you can tell he's actually trying to convince himself as well as the others..