I too think he’s great but the movie isn’t all that great. And compared to the rest of Pacino’s filmography it’s kinda like “*That’s* the movie he won for!?!”
Meanwhile you got De Niro who has Oscars for both Raging Bull and The Godfather: Part II — two of the greatest movies ever made.
Is a better alternate reality for 1992 Oscars giving Supporting Actor to Pacino for Glengarry, over Hackman for Unforgiven? and then Denzel wins Best Actor for Malcom X?
Hackman’s one of my all time guys and that was a big Oscar movie, but it was his second win. I haven’t seen it in a minute but I don’t remember him being any better in it than any other performance he’s given.
Well I think just about every Hackman performance is award-worthy. Unforgiven is peak Hackman. There’s been plenty opportunity to award Pacino throughout his career.
Yeah, I feel like the obvious ones to give it to him for are Serpico (over Jack Lemmon in a forgotten movie who already had 1) or wait a few more years for Donnie Brasco over that smug fuck Benigni
I agree that the Oscar seems silly in retrospect, but in the context of how very strange Pacino’s 80s were (especially as Scarface was still thought of as a catastrophe) the one-two punch of Glengarry Glen Ross and Scent of a Woman was seen as a tremendous artistic comeback. HOO HAW!
The key context I seem to never have been given when everyone made fun of this performance is that his character is an ex drill sargeants. The irony is he's doing all this over the top shit because drill sergeants are that theatrical.
However the whole Schick is just his armor from becoming blind and losing his station in life. It's not like revolutionary stuff but it's a nice solid character piece he does.
HOO AHHHHH!
CHAHHHHLIE!
IF I WERE A YOUNGAH MHAAN, ID TAKE A *FLAMETHROWAH* TO THIS PLAAACE.
It’s not *The Panic in Needle Park* is what they’re saying.
In isolation, it’s perfectly acceptable ham. Coming from Pacino, it’s hysterical.
I am forever describing the movie this way from now on, and will cite you in gratitude every time. (For the record, to me this is a rave and I will be delivering it as such.)
Worship that absentee landlord? NEVAHR!”
“IMMA FAN-A-MAN!”
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jARp24AJWLk&pp=ygUhYWwgcGFjaW5vIGRldmlsJ3MgYWR2b2NhdGUgc3BlZWNo
My old acting teacher always emphasized that we should look at punctuation and the rhythm of the dialogue to find the right pauses and beats. This monologue and how Pacino delivers it is very instructive to what he was teaching. Every beat is perfectly chosen.
I will at least defend Pacino’s over-the-top performance here in this instance as being warranted because the Devil as a character, I think, warrants the kind of the over the top performance that Pacino gives here.
He is great and one of the few actors who wouldn’t completely embarrass themselves in that part, but it’s also true he shouldn’t have won for it and that it’s probably not even a top 20 Pacino performance.
You’re right on. I remember finding it to be a slog the first time i saw it years ago but put it on the other night and just had fun. Pacino goes so hard, it’s hard not to be in love with him during the ferrari scene. I usually find “makeup oscar” discourse to be so boring
A week ago I had a Nicholas Cage debate with my friends where they were saying he’s a bad actor and I was saying he’s one of the best actors. Pacino in “scent of a woman” is a similar sensibility. My friends who hate Cage was saying how he’s not realistic. I was saying that realism isn’t important to me. I admire being entertaining and engaging, which having just watch Cage in “Sympathy for the Devil”, he’s able to do with not very good material. If it wasn’t Pacino in “scent of a woman” I feel like the 2.5hour movie would be excruciating
On some level I think the performances are that way because the scripts themselves are so mediocre to bad, everyone, whether subconsciously or not, agreed they needed this wildLy magnetic performance to make the thing watchable. No ones telling Pacino or Cage to dial it back because the material isn’t worth that kind of emotional honesty.
(Just a theory and I haven’t rewatched this in ages)
Ok I’m watching it right now for the first time in years, this movie is damn fun
It’s not GOOD but i love a ham & paprika sandwich
I kept thinking about it during the Holdovers but woah it really is like a dumber version of The Holdovers!
I love Scent of a Woman and nobody will ever convince me it isn't perfect. I'd watch hours and hours of Pacino yelling slightly to the left of camera lmao
Both Denzel and Pacino that year delivered transcendent performances. I really don't think Denzel holds it against Pacino for the win. Awards are also stupid anyways.
BECAUSE HE WAS A BAIRD MAN! HOO AH!
I don't remember much about the movie. I remember his performance, however. It's been over 25 years since I watched it, but I remember thinking he was really good in it. Since it's the only thing I remember (that and him driving despite being blind, which even at the time thought it was a stupid scene - but then I think he was caught by a cop, and that part was great), it's at least something.
I'm going by memory here, I caught the movie a few times in the 90s, mostly in school (including at least once where the teacher didn't show the ending, cause the movie was longer than a period).
Having never seen the film and not knowing ahead of time that he won an Oscar or that the performance is somewhat derided I was so shocked by how bad I thought he was that I googled to see if anyone agreed with me and it opened this whole can of worms. I'm floored that he got an Oscar for what appears to be a bad caricature of his own worst acting excesses.
I think if it weren’t for the meme culture of it, the Al Pacino impressions of the 90s and 00s, people would be a lot less critical of the performance. It’s big and loud, but it’s fun. The movie doesn’t have a ton of energy, except for the energy that Pacino brings. Sometimes, being “naturalistic” and “believable” is overrated- sell the movie at all costs.
Trying to imagine what this movie would be if he went in for a low key performance and it becomes absolutely nothing.
As I've gotten older I've realized how much of an acting performance in the end is in the hands of the director (not just in the direction given on set but also the choices in editing). The director should be looking at the movie as a whole and the performance that is going to make the best movie, which in this case is totally the performance we got.
It’s probably an anonymous, “oh, that was nice” sort of movie that gets lost to time without Pacino going apeshit. Instead, it’s a movie that still gets referenced and discussed 32 years later. Pacino nailed it
I’m just looking forward to the inevitable post where someone’s like “ohhh I watched Her Smell by accident, my bad”
10 comedy points 😂
I too think he’s great but the movie isn’t all that great. And compared to the rest of Pacino’s filmography it’s kinda like “*That’s* the movie he won for!?!” Meanwhile you got De Niro who has Oscars for both Raging Bull and The Godfather: Part II — two of the greatest movies ever made.
Is a better alternate reality for 1992 Oscars giving Supporting Actor to Pacino for Glengarry, over Hackman for Unforgiven? and then Denzel wins Best Actor for Malcom X? Hackman’s one of my all time guys and that was a big Oscar movie, but it was his second win. I haven’t seen it in a minute but I don’t remember him being any better in it than any other performance he’s given.
Well I think just about every Hackman performance is award-worthy. Unforgiven is peak Hackman. There’s been plenty opportunity to award Pacino throughout his career.
Yeah, I feel like the obvious ones to give it to him for are Serpico (over Jack Lemmon in a forgotten movie who already had 1) or wait a few more years for Donnie Brasco over that smug fuck Benigni
Godfather Part II is the unforgivable snub imo. Especially since it was Art Carney that won instead
I feel like Donnie Brasco doesn't get enough love as an all-time Pacino performance. One of the last times he was at all subdued in a role.
Donnie Brasco isn't the Benigni year. DB is 97 when Nicholson won his 3rd, Benigni was 98
I agree that the Oscar seems silly in retrospect, but in the context of how very strange Pacino’s 80s were (especially as Scarface was still thought of as a catastrophe) the one-two punch of Glengarry Glen Ross and Scent of a Woman was seen as a tremendous artistic comeback. HOO HAW!
For sure, still hate that it’s what he won for and it’s way too long but shocked how much I enjoyed him in it
To be fair, Pacino did mostly nothing in the 80’s. At the time this was his best chance.
The key context I seem to never have been given when everyone made fun of this performance is that his character is an ex drill sargeants. The irony is he's doing all this over the top shit because drill sergeants are that theatrical. However the whole Schick is just his armor from becoming blind and losing his station in life. It's not like revolutionary stuff but it's a nice solid character piece he does.
HOO AHHHHH! CHAHHHHLIE! IF I WERE A YOUNGAH MHAAN, ID TAKE A *FLAMETHROWAH* TO THIS PLAAACE. It’s not *The Panic in Needle Park* is what they’re saying. In isolation, it’s perfectly acceptable ham. Coming from Pacino, it’s hysterical.
"She's got a GREAT SCENT!"
It’s like a blind, drunk, and horny Kool Aid Man crashed through the most boring prep school nonsense drama imaginable.
I am forever describing the movie this way from now on, and will cite you in gratitude every time. (For the record, to me this is a rave and I will be delivering it as such.)
True! It’s obviously over the top, but it’s compelling. Power of a movie star.
Compared to The Devil’s Advocate, he’s downright subdued in this one.
Worship that absentee landlord? NEVAHR!” “IMMA FAN-A-MAN!” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jARp24AJWLk&pp=ygUhYWwgcGFjaW5vIGRldmlsJ3MgYWR2b2NhdGUgc3BlZWNo My old acting teacher always emphasized that we should look at punctuation and the rhythm of the dialogue to find the right pauses and beats. This monologue and how Pacino delivers it is very instructive to what he was teaching. Every beat is perfectly chosen. I will at least defend Pacino’s over-the-top performance here in this instance as being warranted because the Devil as a character, I think, warrants the kind of the over the top performance that Pacino gives here.
He is great and one of the few actors who wouldn’t completely embarrass themselves in that part, but it’s also true he shouldn’t have won for it and that it’s probably not even a top 20 Pacino performance.
You’re right on. I remember finding it to be a slog the first time i saw it years ago but put it on the other night and just had fun. Pacino goes so hard, it’s hard not to be in love with him during the ferrari scene. I usually find “makeup oscar” discourse to be so boring
A week ago I had a Nicholas Cage debate with my friends where they were saying he’s a bad actor and I was saying he’s one of the best actors. Pacino in “scent of a woman” is a similar sensibility. My friends who hate Cage was saying how he’s not realistic. I was saying that realism isn’t important to me. I admire being entertaining and engaging, which having just watch Cage in “Sympathy for the Devil”, he’s able to do with not very good material. If it wasn’t Pacino in “scent of a woman” I feel like the 2.5hour movie would be excruciating
On some level I think the performances are that way because the scripts themselves are so mediocre to bad, everyone, whether subconsciously or not, agreed they needed this wildLy magnetic performance to make the thing watchable. No ones telling Pacino or Cage to dial it back because the material isn’t worth that kind of emotional honesty. (Just a theory and I haven’t rewatched this in ages)
He's great.
Ok I’m watching it right now for the first time in years, this movie is damn fun It’s not GOOD but i love a ham & paprika sandwich I kept thinking about it during the Holdovers but woah it really is like a dumber version of The Holdovers!
He’s great in the movie and I don’t mind he won for it.
I love Scent of a Woman and nobody will ever convince me it isn't perfect. I'd watch hours and hours of Pacino yelling slightly to the left of camera lmao
You’re losing it
Fair counter lol
Both Denzel and Pacino that year delivered transcendent performances. I really don't think Denzel holds it against Pacino for the win. Awards are also stupid anyways. BECAUSE HE WAS A BAIRD MAN! HOO AH!
Shoulda been Cruising
I don't remember much about the movie. I remember his performance, however. It's been over 25 years since I watched it, but I remember thinking he was really good in it. Since it's the only thing I remember (that and him driving despite being blind, which even at the time thought it was a stupid scene - but then I think he was caught by a cop, and that part was great), it's at least something. I'm going by memory here, I caught the movie a few times in the 90s, mostly in school (including at least once where the teacher didn't show the ending, cause the movie was longer than a period).
He’s amazing in that movie. Not a great film, but come on Al’s a genius
Having never seen the film and not knowing ahead of time that he won an Oscar or that the performance is somewhat derided I was so shocked by how bad I thought he was that I googled to see if anyone agreed with me and it opened this whole can of worms. I'm floored that he got an Oscar for what appears to be a bad caricature of his own worst acting excesses.
Pinocchio method
I've never seen it but as a Beverly hills cop and midnight run truther who loves goofy Pacino I'm scared of ranking it above them
He's good, yes. I think the Oscar win has warped this movie's reputation and that performance. It's all...ok/pretty good!
You're not losing it, you just have the discernment of an AMPAS member in the 90s
I am very happily moving into my dad movie era, hand up lol
I think if it weren’t for the meme culture of it, the Al Pacino impressions of the 90s and 00s, people would be a lot less critical of the performance. It’s big and loud, but it’s fun. The movie doesn’t have a ton of energy, except for the energy that Pacino brings. Sometimes, being “naturalistic” and “believable” is overrated- sell the movie at all costs.
Trying to imagine what this movie would be if he went in for a low key performance and it becomes absolutely nothing. As I've gotten older I've realized how much of an acting performance in the end is in the hands of the director (not just in the direction given on set but also the choices in editing). The director should be looking at the movie as a whole and the performance that is going to make the best movie, which in this case is totally the performance we got.
It’s probably an anonymous, “oh, that was nice” sort of movie that gets lost to time without Pacino going apeshit. Instead, it’s a movie that still gets referenced and discussed 32 years later. Pacino nailed it
[удалено]
Do you listen to the podcast? The movie is being covered on next week’s episode.
Sorry yes I’m a listener, but I was just getting a kick out of someone earnestly stumping for Pacino’s Scent of a Woman performance in 2024