web
counter
 

You Shall Not (Free) Pass!

By Agent Bedhead | Posted Under Career Assessments | Comments (36)



taxidriver9.jpg

Subject: Robert De Niro, 67-year old American actor, producer, hotelier & director

Date of Assessment: January 7, 2011

Positive Buzzwords: Legendary, Scorsese

Negative Buzzwords: Quantity over quality, Fockers

The Case: It’s a frequently used term in the commend threads of this column; that is, the so-called “free pass” handed out to actors whose careers have undeniably lost their luster but not yet overridden their glory days. However, when an undisputed legend like Robert De Niro has spent the past decade (give or take) churning out a very steady supply of cinematic crap, well, isn’t it about time to revoke that free pass? Although I must admit that the true meaning of the term still eludes me, and perhaps I’m reading the situation wrong by using De Niro as an example; but if many of you still care that much about this former legend, then I’m virtually begging you to please explain your definition of “free pass.” Is a question of continuing to harbor a great deal of fondness for an actor that prevents one from willingly adjusting a positive opinion? Or does it actually point towards the likelihood that one will continue to buy tickets to an actor’s crappy movies because of this inexplicably huge amount of undying respect? If it’s the former, I suppose it’s a matter of personal opinion. If it’s the latter, then I do believe you’re either delusional or disingenuous because — in the case of Robert De Niro — it is truly painful to witness a great deal of his recent work. Certainly, none of the people who sat down for Little Fockers went in with the expectation of watching the master at work, nor is that the case for most of his movies from the past decade. In addition, I just don’t see the point in holding an eternal flame for De Niro when even he’s certainly lost respect for his former self.

The De Niro situation has gotten so bad that when one anticipates a new Robert De Niro movie, the assumption is never that he’ll be appearing in a quality product or even making a bad movie slightly more tolerable. This phenomenon truly puzzles me, and I wonder whether this is a matter of De Niro simply deciding that he no longer wishes to expend the effort required by taking take on those undoubtedly exhausting and mentally tasking roles of yesteryear. Certainly, De Niro’s role selection patterns cannot be attributed to a case of too few compelling roles in existence, for there are enough hungry screenwriters out there to write good scripts, and people would definitely turn out if the legend had continued in his previous capacity. Hell, look at Charles Bronson and Clint Eastwood, who have arguably taken on meatier roles with age. It just doesn’t wash, and even if De Niro truly wanted to “take it easy,” wouldn’t he rather take the route of Jack Nicholson by accepting fewer roles? This certainly doesn’t describe De Niro, who works all the damn time these days. Unfortunately, selectivity is not one of his priorities.

Don’t get me entirely wrong here, for I love me some classic Robert De Niro. Quite simply, there are few actors that have ever reached the heights that his performances achieved within the following films: Mean Streets; The Godfather: Part II (his best performance, in my opinion, since he created a Vito Corleone that was both independent of and consistent with Marlon Brando’s incarnation); Taxi Driver (Travis Bickle lives forever); The Last Tycoon; New York, New York; The Deer Hunter; Raging Bull; Brazil; The Untouchables; Midnight Run; and Jacknife. For quite awhile, only We’re No Angels existed to mess up the streak of memorable classics with iconic De Niro characters. Subsequently, De Niro regained much of his stature by delivering fine performances in respectable movies: Goodfellas; Cape Fear; Casino; Heat (available on Netflix Instant Watch); Sleepers; Jackie Brown; Ronin; and Analyze This. Life was pretty good for Robert De Niro fans.

Then, things took a most decided turn for the worse with many disappointing, head-scratchingly bad De Niro movies: Frankenstein (as “The Creature”); The Fan; Great Expectations; The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle; Shark Tale; Meet the Parents (this one actually wasn’t terrible); Analyze That; Meet the Fockers; Stardust (an overall wonderful film with an inexplicably awful turn from De Niro himself); Righteous Kill (which was actually worth the novelty effect of watching De Niro reunite with Al Pacino); What Just Happened?; Everybody’s Fine; Machete; Stone; and Little Fockers. Throughout it all, De Niro asserted that he appears within all of these movies simply because he loves to work. He simply cannot stop making these movies, and his demonstrated inability to view the proverbial forest for the trees is further emphasized by his directorial work (The Good Shepherd immediately comes to mind) where De Niro exhibited absolutely no regard for pacing or anything else that might not bore his viewers to death. As a director, he’s a lost cause; as an actor, he’s no longer the enigma who can virtually guarantee a quality viewing experience for his audiences through fine performances and iconic characters.

Obviously, there’s been a rather unprecedented general decline in the career of Robert De Niro, and this fact makes me want to go all Ordell Robbie: “What the fuck happened to you, man? Your ass used to be beautiful!”

Prognosis: For those who’d insist that this legendary actor simply needs to find new representation, well, the problem isn’t quite that simple. You see, De Niro famously fired his agent a few years ago, and he’s continued to make some less than impressive decisions. His upcoming slate includes several “in development” titles, which don’t exactly point to selectivity. To make matters worse for De Niro lovers, one of these films is New Year’s Eve (Garry Marshall’s follow-up to Valentine’s Day). However, a bit of good news is that De Niro’s re-teaming with Scorsese for The Irishman (and the confirmed cast roster, interestingly, includes Joe Pesci and Al Pacino). Still, even if Scorsese manages to return De Niro to return to his former state of glory, this would be a temporary fix that will likely be negated with the rest of De Niro’s late-breaking career decisions. Hell, De Niro insists upon maintaining a professional relationship with Ben Stiller, and that keeps his bank account full, but he’ll never be The Robert De Niro ever again.

Agent Bedhead lives in Tulsa, Oklahoma. She and her little black heart can be found at agentbedhead.com.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



The 10 Most Crowd-Pleasing Populist Movies of 2010 | You're As Enthusiastic In Your Hatreds As You Are In Your Loves | An Evening With Patton Oswalt









Comments

Free pass = Did something so good that any future bad work can be overlooked/forgiven.

I choose not to watch the bad stuff.

Posted by: Cindy at January 7, 2011 3:01 PM

...look at Charles Bronson and Clint Eastwood, who have arguably taken on meatier roles with age.

Charles Bronson?
He died years ago!

Posted by: Simon at January 7, 2011 3:14 PM

I've just looked at Charles Bronson's IMDB page and I'm fairly certain now you must be thinking of someone else. Bronson definitely peaked in the 1960s (Great Escape, Magnificent Seven, Once Upon A Time In The West) and went downhill throughout most of the 70s, 80s and 90s.

Posted by: Simon at January 7, 2011 3:22 PM

Christopher Walken is another is another great actor who has been in lots of heaping piles of shit because he "loves to work". I'm not sure why, but I'm inclined to accept this reason from Walken but not from De Niro.

Maybe it's because Walken usually just does cameo parts which turn out to be the high points of otherwise godawful films (see: Joe Dirt and Mousehunt).

I guess when Walken uses the "love to work" excuse I think he's being genuine but I feel De Niro is using it as a cover for becoming a lazy paycheck whore.

Does anyone else share my affection for Walken or do you lump him in with De Niro?

Posted by: RomeoCranberry at January 7, 2011 3:27 PM

Bedhead,
Your link to Heat has actually got me thinking of signing up for Netflix. You should be making a commission off this shit. Stand strong, willpower, fight it.

Posted by: Porkchop Express at January 7, 2011 3:32 PM

I haven't seen The Good Shepherd, but I've become convinced that pacing is one of the most subjective things in movie criticism. I can't count the number of times somebody has said that the pacing in a movie was terrible and I've been totally perplexed.

Posted by: Todd at January 7, 2011 3:35 PM

Walken is just so crazy that it's hard not to love him.

Posted by: pxilated at January 7, 2011 3:36 PM

@Todd: Everything is subjective, some people like some things and some people like other things. Pacing is just one facet that a movie can be judged on, some people can forgive slow or uneven pacing, and some people are irked by it. You know whats more subjective then pacing? Whether or a movie is funny or not.

Posted by: superking at January 7, 2011 3:45 PM

I have no idea which bad movies you are talking about. Robert De Niro simply doesn't make bad movies.

Posted by: admin at January 7, 2011 3:49 PM

I second-third-etc the Walken Love. It does feel genuine from him. The parts he takes are less whorey, less showy, oh and he did that fat Boy Slim thing and that, my dahlings, is a free pass if there ever was one. But he doesn't really need one, now does he? Anyone remember the bogus rumor that he was running for president? There was even a (very convincing) web site. Love that.

De Niro really really cashed in his free pass a billion movies ago. Less is more, dude. As in Less crap, more good sh!t. God...Stardust? Really, Travis? Really? Even Rupert Pupkin would turn his nose up at that.

Posted by: klingonfree at January 7, 2011 3:58 PM

With all due respect, AB, I have to disagree with you on DeNiro's performance in Stardust. The fact that he played a swishy gay pirate, so against his normal archetype, is what made his perfomance so damn fabulous. I love the reveal moment when you realize what's going on, and I love his little dance that he does with the feathery fan, I LOVE everything about his performance.

I also think that fact that he was willing to take the role speaks well of him, and I, well, I already said I disagree. But...a lot!

Posted by: noodlestein at January 7, 2011 4:02 PM

Everything is subjective, superking? Thanks for that little gem.

Ol' Bobby D... sad.

Posted by: Brenton at January 7, 2011 4:25 PM

My father and I did an in house carrerr assessment of DeNiro over the holidays and we were dismayed to come to almost the same conclusions you have in your article. But then I said wait let's also do Pacino, he's much more of a ham and he's been worse than De Niro at putting out the crap. But when we did a side by side comparison it wasn't even close. Al made a few stinkers (Simone, Righteous Kill among them) but he hadn't made nearly as many as old Bobby, and he actually made some pretty good stuff over the last 15-20 years, especially if you include his made-for-TV projects. I would love for you to follow this article with a career assessment of Pacino. It would be great to see if your opinion matches ours.

I usually schedule subjects around movie release dates, so I'm not entirely sure when Pacino will receive an assessment, but it will definitely happen at some point. Of course, De Niro was initially scheduled for a few weeks ago to coincide with the Fockers release, but then Dustin suggested that a Santa theme might be fun and also allowed me to take a breather on New Year's Eve, which explains the slightly untimely De Niro discussion. Anyway, Pacino's on the roster. - AB

Posted by: ed newman at January 7, 2011 4:28 PM

You seriously didn't think that Robert De Niro was halarious in Machete? That was a Funny movie, and both Don Johnson and Robert De Niro were great in that movie, in my opinion.

Seriously, I'm inclined to agree with this post 100 percent, because something you said hit home with me. I no longer expect, as a viewer, for a movie to be great or even all that good when it's starring Robert De Niro. When you said that, I started really listening.

But as a moviegoer, when I went to see Machete, I was Reminded of why I love Robert De Niro as an actor. I think a lot of people missed the point of that performance. It was funny shit and he actually put some effort into it. Also, The Fan. Okay, it's not a Great movie, but he Made that movie. Without De Niro, the Fan would've been boring and not worth the time. I watch that movie when it's on Because of De Niro.

Agree with most of what you said, but Machete and The Fan I think are good performances.

Posted by: Nathan Pettigrew at January 7, 2011 4:48 PM

New Years' Eve? Are you freaking kidding me?

Posted by: seed at January 7, 2011 4:59 PM

Your best Assessment yet, AB.

Gotta say though that Righteous Kill was NOT worth the novelty. One of the worst GD movies I've ever seen.

Posted by: Riles at January 7, 2011 5:07 PM

Seriously, I'm inclined to agree with this post 100 percent, because something you said hit home with me. I no longer expect, as a viewer, for a movie to be great or even all that good when it's starring Robert De Niro...

Posted by: Nathan Pettigrew at January 7, 2011 4:48 PM

Totally agree Nathan


Posted by: Riles at January 7, 2011 5:33 PM

I disagree with AB re De Niro's best performance. I think it ought to be Taxi Driver. That movie, which was practically a long monologue, lived and died by his performance. The Godfather II also had a high quality cast; while Taxi Driver was all about Travis Bickle.

Posted by: KV at January 7, 2011 5:38 PM

Can we stop with the "I love me some..." already?
You are aware that middle-aged white guys are saying it now, right?

Posted by: AndyRooney at January 7, 2011 7:05 PM

Wait what? You didn't like DeNiro in Stardust?

;(

Posted by: Amanda6 at January 7, 2011 8:05 PM

I think the free pass is one of those "we know you can do better. We know your holding back/cashing a paycheck/having fun. We're not gonna judge you for it" things.

I still think De Niro is a helluva actor. Should he be more selective? Maybe, but thats his call. Dude has two Oscars. Is he not allowed to have fun while making shit movies? Yea, the Focker movies are incredibly stupid. But I look at the casts and can't help but think that those sets and wrap parties must be a goddamned blast.

I, too, went "wow, true" when you mentioned that I don't assume a movie will be great because he's in it. But if I see him taking a serious role, I do still make that assumption. I did so with Righteous Kill and still have a very hard time accepting that it's as bad as it was particularly because fucking Robert De Niro was in it.

Maybe Im just less apt to be jaded with an actor. Im cool with that.

Posted by: Lennon at January 7, 2011 10:14 PM

I love DiNiro. He is awesome, and his role's in the Godfather movies.........Exquisite. The man was good back then.

Posted by: Lordninja at January 8, 2011 12:25 AM

This assessment makes me realize how many of his newer films I have not and will never see. I'm not usually one to give anyone a free pass.

I'm glad ed newman brought up Pacino, because as I was reading this I was wondering how their latter years would compare. I eagerly await that assessment.

I'm not sure why, but I'm inclined to accept this reason from Walken but not from De Niro.

I would agree with that. I like Walken, and he does make a lot of crap, but I can't say it's nearly as disappointing as when De Niro does it.

Posted by: Uda at January 8, 2011 4:41 AM

your confusion lies in the fact that you think he is an actor. he is actually just the most terrifying man who ever lived. directors like to catch that shit on camera.

no, seriously, if you ever watch an interview with him, you know, where he is exciting like a janitor, deep like a taco, and intelligent like an eraser, then you realise the de niro greatness.

that great heap of dryer lint just holy fucking activates in a movie.

and yes he was the bees knees in stardust.

Posted by: idleprimate at January 8, 2011 9:14 AM

I tried to watch The Good Shepherd. I only lasted about ten minutes, so I can't really comment about its overall pacing, but if there is a prize for cliches per minute, we have a winner.

Posted by: The Mutt at January 8, 2011 12:31 PM

Midnight Run is on my 10 favorite watch over and over lists.

I will forgive him anything for that movie.

Posted by: amanda at January 8, 2011 2:05 PM

i think that De Niro has gotten to the point where he has earned the privilege of phoning it in and making $$. i have no problem with that. i don't see the point of having him work himself to death. for what? so that you can be less smarmy and judgmental? too bad for you.

keep it real Bobby. you paid your dues, now it's time to coast.

Posted by: lachica at January 8, 2011 3:10 PM

Are we really not putting Goodfellas in the top tier of movies?

Posted by: TheEmpress at January 8, 2011 4:59 PM

otherwise godawful films (see: Joe Dirt and Mousehunt).
---
Hey! I like "Mouse Hunt."

And Yes! to "Goodfellas" in the top tier.

Posted by: , at January 8, 2011 7:27 PM

No King of Comedy mention? Such an underrated performance.

Posted by: Jeremy at January 9, 2011 3:04 PM

I agree in the Walken situation.
And I'm so thankful. I'm glad you roll your eyes too whenever there's a new DeNiro project about to come out.

Posted by: james at January 9, 2011 6:17 PM

I also disagree with your interpretation of Stardust. That shit was gold.

Posted by: Peter G at January 9, 2011 6:37 PM

De Niro's pirate, that is.

Posted by: Peter G at January 9, 2011 6:38 PM

I share the gay pirate love. Imagine how fun he and Johnny Depp would be together.

Posted by: snapnhiss at January 10, 2011 12:56 PM

I wish they would get together. *sigh*

Posted by: Ilmarien at January 10, 2011 4:00 PM

The criticism isn't totally off base, but I think the omission of Once Upon a Time in America from the list of great movies and inclusion of Machette on the list of worthless movies, make this post read a little phoned in. Sort of a Meet the Great-Grand-Fockers of film criticism.

Posted by: Mark at January 11, 2011 3:34 PM