Ouch: De Niro And Pacino Get Put Through The Ringer
 Friday, April 25th, 2008

 

These two faces would be more than welcome at most any dinner table in America.  Am I wrong?  And, I'm sure more than a few thousand million internationally.  But in Tinseltown, veteran actors Robert De Niro and Al Pacino have been given an icy cold shoulder this month.  "88 Minutes," the newly-released movie starring De Niro and Pacino, opened last Friday at the box office with about $2.37 million.  It was fourth, behind "Forgetting Sarah Marshall," "The Forbidden Kingdom," and "Prom Night."

By Wednesday it moved up to #3, and grossing about $8.5 million in five days.  Now, this may seem scant compared to the, say, $25.7 million "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" has raked in in the same time frame; but I do find it worth mentioning that I've seen at least a dozen commercials for "Sarah Marshall," and not one for "88 Minutes."  And I rarely believe in coincidences.  (I'm not saying the former isn't deserving - I plan to see both!)

"88 Minutes" has been torn to shreds by critics.  Patrick Goldstein of the L.A. Times authored an article on the film this week, calling it an "embarrassing...hapless thriller," and pointed out that "Pacino has made a string of bad films lately," while "De Niro...has largely abandoned serious dramatic work for a spate of forgettable horror and crime thrillers...and lowbrow comedy high jinks like 'Meet the Fockers' and 'Analyze That.'"

Sure, the jokes in those films weren't "highbrow."  Were they intended to be?  I wasn't particularly wild about the flicks myself, but there's hardly a male I've met that doesn't know at least one quote from either of those movies.  And it made money - "Meet The Fockers" grossed over half a billion dollars.  But--what do I know?--I'm three time zones over.

Last week, De Niro broke off from Creative Artists Agency (CAA), and Goldstein refers to a couple of Hollywood blogs (Hollywood Elsewhere and one powered by Variety) with a quote shakily attributed to a CAA agent that disses De Niro:

"De Niro had a choice ten or so years ago," the commenter wrote, who left the name "A CAA Agent" in the scathing post (click to read it in full in a new window).  "He could either go the [Jack] Nicholson route - very selective, very particular, protect the brand - or go out sending himself up in tripe like 'Analyze This,' which made money but turned him into that 'old psycho guy.'"

In my humble opinion--and I haven't seen "88 Minutes" yet, but stinker or not--the only person who should be embarrassed here is the perpetrator(s) of the "anonymous" letter.  It could have been anyone:  a CAA Agent or intern; a former bit-part costar with a vendetta; a random Hollywood hanger-on with a brain and internet access.  Who's to say, really?  It's not even clear where it was originally submitted.  But now it's allegedly being e-mailed "all over town."

Whomever it was that actually typed that up and posted it where movie critics--and the general public!--had easy access to it, should be ashamed to the core.  To hide in anonymity behind the cloak of cyberspace and:  a) potentially influence reviewers right before opening day; b) cast cowardly insults at two of America's most beloved Italian-American actors, with decades and a hell of a lot of work invested in their careers...in a post with grammatical errors galore that was actually taken serious by people...how low can you go?  It's at a least a quadruple-slam by the "Agent" against:  De Niro; producer's Barry Levinson, Mark Cuban, and Jon Avnet (respectively); and oddly, even the hotel business.

"88 Minutes" was already facing a much greater challenge on its way to the box office:  it began filming back in 2005, but its release was pushed back due to pirated copies of the film being distributed internationally a year before its scheduled release.

If you never considered the weight of the phrase "the price of fame," think how De Niro and Pacino must feel:  each has been acting for over 40 years, directing, and producing; but in Beverly Hills and beyond "young" and "fresh" is "it" and respect is just a word gossipistas throw around between mags and the 'net.  They're not knocking on the doors of middle class America and seeing iconic actors' framed on people's walls.  If a film doesn't perform huge on opening weekend - or, as in this case, an actor decides to switch agencies, and/or reap the rewards of years of award-winning performances - the claws can come out, and they come out sharp.

If you ask me, we sorely lack more Robert De Niro's and Al Pacino's.  And if they truly do represent the end of an era, as this poster (who has still failed to identify him or herself) implies with the "turn back time" comments, I am sure that I am not the only person in America saddened by that.

Comments > >