Al Pacino May Meet Oscar Again
Saturday, September 28, 2019 at 7:38PM
Oscar may call an old favourite's name again this year. Al Pacino, an eight-time nominee, has not been recognized by his peers in the Academy since he won for Scent of a Woman (1992) more than a quarter century ago. However in Martin Scorsese The Irishman he finally gets a showcase part that will likely bring him back to the ceremony.
In this story of American moral decay and gangland infiltration into all structures of American society, Pacino plays Jimmy Hoffa the controversial leader of the country’s strongest union, the Teamsters. The film tracks his involvement with the mafia particularly his friendship with hitman Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro). It’s not only a great part but a flashy and memorable one particularly in comparison with the quieter tones that his co-stars De Niro and Joe Pesci have to play...
Pacino shows us many aspects of Hoffa. The blustery loud arrogant and power hungry man who's not afraid to antagonize both friends and foes. Also the tender family man who develops a friendship with Sheeran’s daughter Peggy (played as a child by Lucy Gallina and as an adult by Anna Paquin). In addition to those different sides Pacino gets to be funny as he tries to one up and out talk both his mafia cronies and the government lawyers who are trying to put him in jail. It’s a very loud performance, not just because of the yellingl but because he shows a range of emotions and plays the part to the hilt with contrasting tones. Some people might remember the real Hoffa and quibble with how exacting the mimicry is, but we think the strength of the performance will drown out the naysayers. Though Pacino came to the press conference at the New York Film Festival equipped with a relevant anecdote; he listened to tapes of Hoffa's speeches on set.
In particular Pacino has a big scene around the middle of the film that will surely seal the nomination for him. Hoffa is mad at his subordinates - we’ll keep the reason why so as not to spoil too much - and he is berating them, in full yelling and fury mode. However just in the next scene he has to console a friend and apologize for his outburst. And just when you think he might yell again, he flips it and out comes kindness and empathy as well as comedy. All this within a few short minutes. He nails it.
The Irishman team at NYFF opening night
His biggest obstacle on the way to the Dolby might be his co-star Pesci. We assume they will both be campaigned in the supporting actor category. Pesci is quieter but just as good and some critics have already shown a preference for that performance in their reviews and reactions after Friday’s premiere. But we think the Academy will prefer the big, loud, funny and audience-pleasing performance of the once-regular Oscar nominee.
Reader Comments (23)
It would be nice if both made it but I feel only 1 will and it'll be Pacino.
Pacino is an 8 time nominee. The year he won he was a double nominee. He and Geraldine Page have the same record of one out of eight.
Murtada: I'm definitely hoping for Pesci getting his third. Honestly, of who was plausible to get nominated in 1992, it looks REALLY bad that Stephen Rea was nominated ahead of him. The problem isn't that Rea was playing a bottled up masculine blank. The problem is his version of that, ESPECIALLY in The Crying Game, is less Irish Ryan Gosling and more Irish Ben Affleck.
As far as hot takes go, that is earth's molten core insane.
Murtada. I predict both will get in. This feels like an Up in the Air/Bugsy situation to me.
The question for me is does DeNiro get a nomination in Lead? I think DiCaprio is looking more and more vulnerable by the day. God that category is stacked!
Arkaan: Huh? I mean, which white guy would you cut from that field outright? Eastwood? Downey? Pacino doesn't need to be cut so much as switched. And as far as pulling from the actual Globe Comedy field that year? Bob Roberts is the best nominee they managed that year, and that nomination would have been only slightly better. Pesci would have been slightly out of nowhere but considering Tomei WON? Can't really say his nomination would have been implausible either.
@Michael R
DiCaprio was never a threat to the season even when people saw the movie. Pitt stood out different for best in show reviews. Since Leo won his overdue statuette he'll have to do more than merely entertain to compete in subsequent races.
I sense this season will be kinder to veteran performers filling out the slates.
Pacino had in his career some of the best performances of all time, like The Godfather II, Dog Day Afternoon, The Godfather, Serpico and Glengarry Glen Ross, in that order. I think he deserves an Oscar for something closer to those performances than Scent of a Woman.
Al should have at least FOUR OSCARS,GODFATHER,SERPICO,DOG DAY AFTERNOON., and the one he finally won it for Scent of a woman.. He has given some of tne GREATEST performances in film HISTORY PERIOD! He is a legend and isn't getting any younger! Plus a career Oscar too!
/3rtful - re 7/8 thank you fixed.
Michael R - the way that category is shaping up and what he has to work with; I think De Niro is not likely. Though he's v good, but also his perf is the one that suffers the most from the de-aging not looking great.
Pacino’s career warrants 2 Oscars, it would be great if he won his second for what sounds like a great performance. I think I enjoy him in Scent of a Woman more than most people do but it still sucks as a fan that he didn’t get to win for any of his brilliant and iconic performances from the 70’s but for a performance nobody considers among his best and over a greater and iconic Denzel in Malcolm X.
i feel about pacino the same way i feel about streep--i'm ok with their "career" oscars because in my mind they are both being awarded for their (ineligible, television) performances in ANGELS IN AMERICA. if ANGELS had been a theatrical release, i'm confident that they both would have won in lead, no question.
when you think of it in these terms, it's easier to handle :)
IMO De Caprio has a much better chance to be nominated than De Niro but we’ll see.
On an unrelated note Murtada I am about to sit down to brunch and then see Hustlers. So excited!
@Charles, can we not? Pacino and Streep both won an Emmy for Angels in America, which is its own reward. Why would TV performances factor into motion picture awards? They're different mediums, which allowed the play to be adapted into an (epic) miniseries. Just be grateful for that.
I don't think there is any audience for this 3-hour Netflix film, so talking about Oscar nominations seems like a waste of time.
Volvagia, this is your statement
"I'm definitely hoping for Pesci getting his third. Honestly, of who was plausible to get nominated in 1992, it looks REALLY bad that Stephen Rea was nominated ahead of him. The problem isn't that Rea was playing a bottled up masculine blank. The problem is his version of that, ESPECIALLY in The Crying Game, is less Irish Ryan Gosling and more Irish Ben Affleck."
I wildly disagree. I don't think it looks bad that Stephen Rea was nominated ahead of Joe Pesci in 1992 (presumably for My Cousin Vinny?). I think Stephen Rea's performance in The Crying Game is fantastic and holds up to multiple viewings. I don't even think he's that blank in the sense that his decisions are inscrutable and I legitimately have no idea where the "Irish Ben Affleck" comment comes from. While I agree it's different from a Ryan Gosling inscrutability it's no less interesting or rich.
" I mean, which white guy would you cut from that field outright?"
I think Washington and Rea are the clear class of the field. I'd drop Eastwood and Pacino for Jack Lemmon (Glengarry Glen Ross) and Tim Robbins (The Player or Bob Roberts).
Michael R - I wanna know what you thought of hustlers?
@Huh: Huh? Considering the last f***ing Avengers movie was 3 hours long, and many of the big Oscar champs over the decades were 3 hours or more--GONE WITH THE WIND, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, SOUND OF MUSIC, GODFATHER, GODFATHER 2, TITANIC, LORD OF THE RINGS--your comment is absurd. Are you just trolling?
Trying not to read up too much on the movie, but I am surprised anyone thinks the Academy won't be down for an extremely long Scorsese film. Considering he only has one Oscar, Pacino only has one and even De Niro with his two - any/all of them could win without anyone batting an eye. I'm interested to see how this plays out. Scorsese clearly delivered what Netflix was willing to spend so much money to get, so now the ball's in their court. It'll also be interesting if Spielberg has the nerve to try to submarine Scorsese, one of the few directors in Hollywood that rivals his level of respect and love for film.
Super fun Murtada. Could not take my eyes of of Lopez. What a star turn! Hope she gets nominated.
I just watched Hustlers so will interject with this:
I think she's definitely a lead, tho more the secondary lead. I'm very good with letting that go in reasonable cases. Hell, in Django I really think the film is about Django, and adding the final (unnecessary) half hour, he's the lead and Waltz can go either way.
But the film isn't really about the Destiny character, not outright anyway. Lopez isn't total category fraud but she's a lead.
That said, she is terrific in the movie. Should she be nominated? Not sure, but she's worth mentioning. Obviously the best performance she's given in 20 years (tho outside of The Cell, which I like a lot, what else is there?).