He smiles because he knows he’s decided at that moment to possibly/probably do something impetuous yet honest that will endanger himself, yes? That’s how I read it nowadays (barely noticed it for several screenings). It’s an incredible moment. That’s pretty potent stuff.
But Pacino gets to kick the TV out the of his car. And yell at his wife’s lover. And he gets all the best one-liners. And he seems a bit wiser, all said and done…particularly once De Niro’s dead and Pacino remains alive.
In terms of acting they both lost (natalie portman was good and that was about it)
they both lost in righteous kill too, in that film even 50 cent out acted them.
tldr – but:
In a sword fight – DeNiro would win by slicing off Pacino’s right arm, then while Pacino was writhing in pain he would drive the sword deep into his heart, twisting the blade around clockwise while peering deep into his eyes, reveling in the sick pleasure of seeing the last breaths of life escape from his lungs.
HOWEVER, if they found themselves on a poorly constructed bridge, high above a raging river filled with dirty needles, broken glass and piranhas, then I think Pacino would win by kicking DeNiro in the left nut, causing him to lose his balance and tumbling into his watery grave.
Heat was good, but I find the acclaim surrounding it a bit puzzling. Both have done so much better.
Comparing their best work:
DeNiro – Taxi Driver, Raging Bull
Pacino – The Godfather, Dog Day Afternoon
I’m going with DeNiro
I definitely feel both their performances in HEAT are among their best.
For me, the time Pacino and DeNiro are on screen together are among the weakest moments in the film.
I love their conversation. It’s like if Tom and Jerry sat down and laid out their exact reasons to continue harrowing each other, working towards absolute clarification that it isn’t going to stop. Two people considered top of their job and the audience wants both to “win”, and Mann pulls them together and has them state flat out that they both intend to, no matter what. DRAMA!
—PolarisDiB
I dunno. I get what you’re saying P, but for me the way it’s shot is stylistically boring—about 6 minutes of over- the-shoulder shot/reverse shot, so all you get it head and shoulders, head and shoulders. Surely there was a more interesting way to stage this.
Also, aside from mannerisms and idiosyncracies, Pacino and De Niro don’t bring much of anything to the Mann idiom:
Here’s the same scene from LA Takedown:
This scene, despite being played by considerably lesser actors, plays just as well for me as the Pacino/De Niro version.
I really think that Mann was keeping the shot-reverse shot structure and the occasional flat, level two-shot to show that these two are on equal ground, and have no illusions about what they are saying or their power over each other. The meaning is much more in the dialog and performance, and the lighting helps too because of how bright and flat it is, showing no shadows, no illusions, no aggression, and no compromise.
—PolarisDiB
Why do we have to narrow this down as a competition between Deniro and Pacino? That spoils it, imo. Both did superb jobs and were at the top of their game, from Deniro’s “tunnel revelation” and stoic performance to Pacino and his boisterous, unflappable performance: “But she gotta GRRRRREAT ASS! AND YOU GOT YOUR HEAD ALL THE WAY UP IT!” “GIMME ALL YA GOT! GIMME ALL YA GOT!” These were some of the most memorable film scenes of the 90s. Deniro builds a character totally definitive of his character’s philosophy of “don’t get attached to anything you can’t turn your back on in 30 seconds if you spot the heat around the corner.” maintaining an emotional distance, yet captivating and respectable persona that pulls you in. “We’re not after your money, your money is ensured by the federal government. We’re after the bank’s money.” It shows his character having humanity, and not the cold, callous killer cowboy of Waingro, whom he cannot let stay, and it winds up being his downfall. One of my favorite all time films, and the best cops and robbers caper ever, imo.
Did the whole DeNiro versus Pacino thing even exist before Heat?
As in, did people say, “Man, why aren’t DeNiro and Pacino in movies together?” “Godfather II, bro.” “No, I said together dude” before Heat came out, or was it more like Heat came out and people said, “Say! Why aren’t these two in movies together more often?” “Godfather II, bro” “No I mean more often than that…”
In Godfather II they never meet because they play characters from different time periods, in Heat they meet only twice and are both antagonists and both antiheroes, and in Righteous Kill they are partners. They are considered similar because of their gangster/Mafia movie roles, with stuff like Casino (which I watched tonight, by the way) and Carlito’s Way (which I watched the other day) not similar at all yet really covering similar, familiar terrority that comparisons can be drawn in.
It’s a false dichotomy like the whole Keaton vs. Chaplin deal, or one of the most absurd ones I tend to hear about, Fellini vs. Bergman (why those two directors, I’ll never know, but I still sort of know where people are coming from when they ask it in a generic “black and white art film with subtitles” sort of way that isn’t supported by the actual films), but I’m wondering if existed before Heat or Heat brought it to the fore.
—PolarisDiB
It is rather like comparing Keaton and Chaplin, I think. But, if I really have to choose, I’m afraid I’d have to go with Pacino, here. Hard to say why, though. I think I’ve been more impressed by Pacino’s range than by De Niro’s. Pacino’s very restrained work in the first two GODFATHERS, and his bigger work in DOG DAY AFTERNOON, DICK TRACY, and ANGELS IN AMERICA are really impressive. Pacino has consistently sought to test himself in big roles, like Ricky Roma, Richard III, Teach, Shylock, Roy Cohn.
It doesn’t always work, of course. Bad Pacino (SCARFACE, etc.) is pretty damn bad, it can just devolve into senseless shouting and gimmickry. But when it works, man oh man.
Not to say that De Niro’s not shown range, and all that. But he doesn’t really seem willing to stretch himself any more. Nothing can ever dim the brilliance of his best work, of course. His Jake Lamotta and Travis Bickle, to say nothing of his Vito Corleone, and even his Stanley (from the nearly forgotten STANLEY AND IRIS) are as good as anything anyone has ever done. God bless, and all that. But I’d give a lot to see him try his hand at Mamet, or Shakespeare.
Yeah, the big thing about Heat was that they were going to be on-screen together, and to me that was actually a big letdown in a film I otherwise like a lot.
-really think that Mann was keeping the shot-reverse shot structure and the occasional flat, level two-shot to show that these two are on equal ground, and have no illusions about what they are saying or their power over each other. The meaning is much more in the dialog and performance, and the lighting helps too because of how bright and flat it is, showing no shadows, no illusions, no aggression, and no compromise-
Yeah, OK, but the way Mann shot it limits the actors to pretty much using just voice and facial expressions. He could have gone to a level, balanced two-shot more often and
1. given the scene a less monotonous rhythm
2. opened up the space so that the actors had bodies, and then the could act with gestures, posture, etc.
I really have no preference for either because, as Lester mentions, they’re rather different in style. I do have my preferences in other false dichotomies simply because I happen to like the one better than the other (Keaton is in no way “better” than Chaplin because the two were doing different things. But I like what Keaton was doing more), but here I have no preference as actually I don’t really have any attachment to either acting method.
—PolarisDiB
To me the big difference in style between the two is due to the fact that Pacino had a much more extensive theatrical background before he really broke into film, while De Niro was pretty much off and running in film with De Palma by the time he was twenty.
Most memorable roles:
PACINO:
Godfather 1 & 2
Dog Day Afternoon
Scent of a Woman
Serpico
Scarecrow
And Justice for All
Cruising
Scarface
Glen Gary Glen Ross
Carlito’s Way
Heat
Donnie Brasco
The Insider
Any Given Sunday
The Devil’s Advocate
DENIRO:
Raging Bull
Godfather II
Taxi Driver
Stanley and Iris
Heat
Mean Streets
The Deer Hunter
True Confessions
King of Comedy
Once Upon a Time in America
The Untouchables
Goodfellas
Cape Fear
Guilty by Suspicion
A Bronx Tale
Casino
Ronin
Analyze This
Looks like Deniro has more memorable roles in my book.
This is where they drink the coffee right?
YESSS!
hahahahah.
omg. i love pacino because of that damned coffee commercial.
I’m with Lester. I’m not going to rate one over the other. I think they’re both incredible actors and that coffee scene in Heat is one of my all-time favorite movie scenes. I like it that they were mostly closeups. They say so much with their faces and voices and I love scenes like that.
@Matt Parks – I did watch the clip of the two “lesser actors” but it didn’t move me the way Pacino/DeNiro did. Of course, I already have an emotional attachment tooth actors so it would be a hard sell anyway. I’m considering seeing the later version but so often the remake doesn’t hold a candle to the original.
Just to be clear, LA Takedown (1989) was made six years before Heat (1995), as a TV movie, so. if anything, LA Takedown is the original and Heat the remake.
-already have an emotional attachment-
Yeah, and Mann and the actors are relying on this in that scene. That’s part of what I don’t like about it.
I have to agree with probably the majority here: Heat is an important film in the general genre of crime. Not only is it one of Michael Mann’s best, but it has an all-star cast and it’s still well-done. Wonderful editing, lighting, and the way certain scenes are handled is just pro work. If Mann could churn out a couple more on this level, he’d definitely become one of the modern greats … but that’s something else entirely.
I always warm to Pacino I tend to find, but it’s difficult to compare the two in this film because they’re really polar opposites personality-wise. They are often compared to each other as being two sides of the same coin, but IMO, it’s not that at all. Sure, career-wise these characters have a kind of yin-yang existence, but the way those characters are portrayed is just spot on. Pacino’s character with his blunt, hardened quick talk and erratic wavelengths, and Deniro’s character that’s very laidback, methodical, and actually, I found him rather hesitant. It’s not for more than a moment, but before any important action he takes a couple beats and then proceeds without hesitation. Pacino’s character didn’t have that – he acted as soon as he thought.
I don’t really think of either of them as ‘wiser’ because Heat isn’t just about those two characters, but every character involved with those two characters. Pacino would’ve been clueless if it wasn’t for two of his partners doing the dirty work and handing him leads – of course, Pacino found a lot on his own, but it was teamwork that eventually led to their success (and also good luck). Deniro just had the bad luck of being on the criminals’ side – 9 times out of 10 the criminal is always caught.
I can’t compare Heat to L.A. Takedown, but considering Heat on it’s own, it’s a helluva film and I really find it hard to believe that someone can flat dislike it. I could understand if one wasn’t a fan of this genre or filmmaker or approach to filmmaking, but altogether? Meh, I think one’s attachment to a previous film can colour one’s opinion of a later one.
“Most memorable roles:”
Someone’s forgetting Panic in Needle Park and 1900…
I think the LA Takedown scene comes off like bad daytime television. The Heat scene focuses on the faces (the eyes, the movement of the head, particularly De Niro’s slant) and the dialogue (inflections, pauses). With good actors, such little nuances can be engaging and even exciting.
With LA Takedown, there’s hardly any inflection or pauses; the eyes only look ahead. I don’t believe any of what they’re saying.
She’s got a grrrrreat ass!
You say lines like that, you win everything.
Not many actors could say such a line without looking completely ridiculous. Pacino looks ridiculous too, but he just doesn’t care.
What we get with the Heat v LA Takedown scenes is a brilliant acting class. Look at McCarthy in LA T, he’s stiff, he actually looks afraid, and his eyes are just staring forward. Then DeNiro, his eyes and little movements are the thing. I think we get an idea of Neil’s discomfort in the scene, but he’s not afraid. Then there’s the guy in the Pacino role, could he make it in Soaps, he’s horrible, but he doesn’t know it. But Pacino is in his element in the scene and nails it. I like Deniro better in the scene and in the film, but Pacinio does what Pacino does and does it well.
Oh, and Parks, thank you for posting the LA Takedown scene, it’s amazing to watch the two scenes together.
Yeah how those can be compared other than as a slight amusement is kinda funny. Really? OK, we get it, they recycled the script from that scene – BIG deal. Compared together, there’s no contest. Pacino and Deniro’s weakest moments? Eh, we must’ve watched two different films.
Uli³Cain
I searched for the exact topic and nothing, maybe other threads alluded to it, but this thread is only about Heat and these two actors and who acquitted themself the best in the films, use other films as references to prove your point.
- – - -
So, Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino face off in Heat for the first time ever on screen, who came out on top?
I think DeNiro did, and I’ll use just one example of why I think so…
Neil is home free, he’s got his girl, he’s got his new out, and he drives through the tunnel and we get this bright light, and Neil fully realizes it and smiles, but then he blinks and the smile is gone, he needs to kill Wayne Groh. Great fucking acting, never over the top, always in control. Brilliant work.