Al Pacino: What the Hoo-Haw Happened?
Indeed, looking back on it, Scarface did appear to be one of those movies that would fuel a fire of indignant outrage among certain segments of society only to be half-forgotten. Few could have predicted the character of Tony Montana would become an icon to a generation of young African-American kids. Fewer still would have predicted it would be one of the last great performances we’d see from Al Pacino.
Despite the seemingly nonstop appearance of The Godfather movies on television, few people under thirty probably realize that once upon a time Al Pacino was one of the finest and most subtle actors in films. Pacino was an icon of the 70s, referenced in other films being made at the time.
He seemed to be an unstoppable force. The guy made The Godfather Parts I and II, Serpico, and Dog Day Afternoon all within a span of three years. All of those movies belong on anyone’s list of the top thirty movies of the decade. Al Pacino was able to stand out in a decade that also saw Robert DeNiro, Dustin Hoffman and Jack Nicholson in peak form.
So what the hoo-haw happened? This man who used to be able to convey more with a glance than most actors could with an entire script has turned into an actor who for some reason feels the need to growl out every line. With few exceptions, Al Pacino has become an embarrassment. Although I still laugh out loud every time I watch Dick Tracy, and though there are flashes of his brilliance available in Sea of Love and Insomnia and a handful of others, those brief glimpses into what used to be Al Pacino are thoroughly undone by his just plain painful performances in such movies as The Devil’s Advocate and City Hall.
Especially The Devil’s Advocate. Any performance that makes Keanu Reeves look good in comparison is troubling. What was the deal with Pacino? Does he really think the Devil would have to go to such extremes to prove himself evil? The devil should be the most subtle and soft spoken character ever played. I actually had to have the remote in my hand when watching the movie-which would have been an effort to get through even if Pacino had been good-in order to turn the volume down every time he spoke. It was just an amazingly bad piece of overacting in light of the man doing it.
Pacino could very well have taken home an Oscar for any of those movies he made in the early 70s and it would have been deserved. Instead, he’s got an Oscar for Scent of a Woman. Well, why not? Every actor in Hollywood knows that the quickest way to bring home the little naked gold guy is to play a character who is either mentally or physically disabled: Hoffman, Day-Lewis, Hanks, Geoffrey Rush. So why not Pacino? Because he’s chewing the scenery big time. I’ve never been able to watch this movie all the way through. It’s just too hard to watch this one gifted actor shout his way into a character.
I admired Al Pacino all throughout the 70s. I still think Dog Day Afternoon is one of the finest acting performances ever captured on film. Heck, when he was three years old I taught my kid to do “Attica, Attica” on demand just by saying the word “Pacino.” In that movie, he is nearly perfect; close to flawless. Which makes it all the more frustrating to me to bypass Pacino movies now. It’s not like the situation with Robert DeNiro, whose genius has been diluted almost entirely because he seems to be on some mad dash to break the record for the most movies ever made by an actor. Pacino still seems to be rather picky about parts. The problem is that once he gets them he doesn’t seem to know what to do with them anymore.
