Chemistry


I took a quick look over these boards, and have come to the conclusion that, somehow, I am the only one who found Pfeiffer and Pacino had no chemistry...

Now, this caught me off guard, because my favorite movie is Scarface. But looking back, they really didn't have that much screen time together, and in my opinion Elvira never truly liked Tony, so I can see how a lack of chemistry could have been missed.

I just watched this movie, and the whole relationship seemed forced. I wasn't really fond of the movie, but in any situation I hate romance movies, so its not that big a deal. To be honest, if I had really liked this movie that would have shocked me. I've always been more of a fan of dramas or action movies. In all honesty the only reason I watched this is because Pacino is my favorite actor, and I had never seen it.

In no way am I bashing this movie, I am just curious to see what everyone thought of the chemistry between the actors.

reply

Andrea...

I'm in general agreement with you, but attribute the problem to Pacino, who wouldn't be my first choice for a romantic lead. I did like the movie, primarily because of the strength of Michelle's performance, who, in my view grows with each role she plays. She is an exceptional actress. I don't see how anyone would think that Frankie could be attracted to Johnny, but do understand that Johnny's love for her might be what she needs.

Scarface might have been a decent picture if Pacino hadn't overplayed it so much. I understand that many folks love his performance, and maybe he did as well, but insofar as it fit with how the rest of the cast portrayed their roles, his didn't fit, imho. He was at his best when his character wasn't required to say anything. For some reason, though, in the scenes where he zones out (on drugs, presumably), the film-makers felt the need to keep the camera rolling for far too long. (The movie was probably too long, though I concede there was much to cover. One way to have shortened it would be to reduce the length of these moments. :-)

James

reply

Due to my love for Pacino, I'd hate to say it, but I agree with your comment about attributing the problem to him. Maybe not so much Pacino himself, but his character. For some reason his character came of more as a creepy stalker (for lack of a better term), than a likable guy. I just really didn't like his character. It seemed like too quickly after they met, he was going after her. Which I guess, in that case, I should probably a finger at the writers, as opposed to the actors. However, I think that the problem lies somewhere in the middle.

As for Scarface, I'm not going to go into detail about this, since there is an entire board dedicated to the movie, but I'm a huge fan of the movie. It's right up my alley in terms of the genre of film I'm into. I don't really think Pacino overplayed it, but I see how so many think he did. Tony Montana was a pretty over the top character, in my opinion. So I think Pacino played him perfectly.

reply

Andrea...

I think the pretext of the movie was that Frankie has to overcome her heavy burden and Johnny was just the one to help her do it. He had to be pushy. Indeed, there were several instances where she strongly resisted, but then later caved. While it doesn't seem all that realistic to me, there may be something to it. Frankie not only had this incredible burden on her, she may have been some sort of submissive as well, if I may use that term, or at least she might be better understood as someone who willingly concedes to wishes if it smoothes things out. The scene where Frankie (seemingly reluctantly) lets Johnny see her (you can probably figure out what I'm referring to) based solely on his desire to do so (the reason he gives should be dismissed) makes sense to me only if something in her allows such exposure. What she was doing, I think, indicates the diminished priority she places on this compared not to how she feels about him, but rather to how she wants not to let this be the topic of conversation, so to speak. The idea of getting it over and done with is an interesting thematic "defense" that a man has when a women brings up the motivation for his advances. Most women, I think, would not give in to this. (I can be wrong, of course.) In any case, the movie advances to its ineluctable conclusion leaving the audience to decide whether Frankie really does love Johnny. My take is that she doesn't.

On Scarface, I wasn't criticizing the over-the-topness, per se, of his character, but rather the diction Pacino gave it. Because it was forced and unnatural (to me, anyway), it weakened what otherwise was intended to be the strong voice of the character. Moreover, and perhaps because of this, I think much of the strength of Tony had to be demonstrated by the reactions of the supporting characters, which I think were admirably played. He is much better in Godfather I and II, in this regard (imho).

James

reply

It was the thought I carried throughout the whole movie, the chemistry was never there! All due respect to Mr. Pacino but he can't play this sort of genre leads and she should have never been picked for the lead role. Michelle Pffeifer alone carried the movie on her back just by herself. If you want to compare chemistry of Pffeifer vs. another actor (in this case George Clooney) in a film within the same genre (One Fine Day) you'll easily notice what having a chemistry on screen is all about. Pacino acting was just so forgetable.

reply

In any case, the movie advances to its ineluctable conclusion leaving the audience to decide whether Frankie really does love Johnny. My take is that she doesn't.


Johnny brings up the song 'Frankie & Johnny' and Frankie comments that in the Frankie in the song kills Johnny. I always assumed that was an indication of what would happen to them. Not that Frankie would actually kill Johnny, but in the end she would break his heart by not loving him the way he loves her. For me their is only based on that it opens both their hearts and evetually leads them to move on with their lives.

reply

Scarface and Montana are not meant to be small and subtle. Also from what I hear from Cubans, there are a lot of Cubans who are as dramatic as Montana. Maybe you're approaching the character and his culture from your culture and expect that world to act just like you and your family acts. I'm a Filipina and when I watch American films, I don't expect them to act like me or my family because they're very different from us.

Btw Scarface was never meant to emulate or be similar to the themes and look of TGF films.

reply

If Pacino had not played it big in Scarface then he would've under performed. Because Scarface is supposed to be about excess and the entire film was purposely meant to be over the top melodramatic x 100. Many people fail to see that. They want gangster films to be portrayed through rose tinted glasses and they want it romanticized like The Godfather films, not the loud, ugly, in your face film that Scarface was always intended to be.

reply

best thread on this lame site.very well written. i agree w all the points. nevertheless, its an insanely good movie. it has an 80s feel, even though its from 91. also a bit sad. i saw this in the theatres in 91 w my mom. have not been been to the movies since. i got 10 movie channels baby

reply

She was just very jaded because of her past relationships, but in the end, you could tell she fell for him! It was a very gradual buildup, and not the love at first sight kind of nonsense!

reply

Wow, I'm surprised that people don't care for Johnny. I'd totally go for a guy like that. I didn't see him as a creepy stalker but a guy who has enough confidence to go for what he wants. Speaking as a woman who has had to do the pursuing way too often (many guys are pretty frightened and insecure) I'd totally like to have someone like that pursue me. I also felt they had massive chemistry.

The scene where Frankie (seemingly reluctantly) lets Johnny see her (you can probably figure out what I'm referring to) based solely on his desire to do so (the reason he gives should be dismissed) makes sense to me only if something in her allows such exposure. What she was doing, I think, indicates the diminished priority she places on this compared not to how she feels about him, but rather to how she wants not to let this be the topic of conversation, so to speak. The idea of getting it over and done with is an interesting thematic "defense" that a man has when a women brings up the motivation for his advances


I don't know, I think the reason many women might be put off by doing this isn't because they simply wouldn't want to but are perhaps insecure of the way their bodies look. Many women don't think their bodies are good enough. But I saw Frankie's initial refusal to do it as coming from her gradually letting her walls down. Doing that would create more intimacy and closeness and she's resisting that through most of the movie.

It's funny how people are comparing this role to Scarface. They are really totally different kinds of movies. I'm not a big Scarface fan although I've heard he considers it his best role. At the end when he goes nuts and starts going "Say hello to my little friend. . .", I always burst out laughing.

reply

Wow, I'm surprised that people don't care for Johnny. I'd totally go for a guy like that. I didn't see him as a creepy stalker but a guy who has enough confidence to go for what he wants. Speaking as a woman who has had to do the pursuing way too often (many guys are pretty frightened and insecure) I'd totally like to have someone like that pursue me. I also felt they had massive chemistry.


I'd love to have someone like that too. In fact, I relate to Johnny like crazy, since I've gotten on the wrong foot with people I've fallen in love with myself, by showing too obvious signs of being really needy, lonely and desperate. Frankie is one of my favorite Al Pacino portrayals, since he's person with just so much humanity. He doesn't feel like a character, he made me feel like I was really watching a real human's life and his struggles. Brilliant performance by Pacino, just fantastic.

reply

Frankie is one of my favorite Al Pacino portrayals

Al Pacino played Johnny not Frankie. It is had not to get confused as they are both typically male names.

๐Ÿšœ๐Ÿ‘ฆTractor boy...got you in my tractor beam!๐Ÿ‘ฆ๐Ÿšœ

reply

But the logic of Owleye1 is lose, not to mention other syntactic errors like "finger at", and "fit" instead of "fits", and later Owleye1 inverted "women" and "men"

Edit : My take is, Frankie loves Johnny, what else ? Why to make a movie if it weren't the case, for their wouldn't be any point living. And Debussy's Clair de lune, and the guy at the radio station says it, "who ever you are", it's valid for all of us.

Maybe this is the only romance movie i really like.

reply

Ooooh, no, I totally disagree with you. I saw the film for the first time yesterday and I thought there was so much chemistry between them, I actually googled afterwards to see if they'd had a relationship in real life!!


reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I noticed the lack of chemistry here and in the overrated Scarface. De Niro would have a been a better choice and definitely would have had chem with Michelle. This didn't stop me from enjoying the movie, because of Michelle's endearing performance.

reply

get real.

this film is romance personified. and the ending... man the ending. the older you get, the better this picture gets.

reply