Whos acting do you think is better and who has the better acting career.
I think its alpacino better movies (godfather scarface) better acting and just simply better pitt is just a ladies man but dont remeber any major film which will be remembered for all eternity like pacinos godfather (the best movie ever made).
2007-03-09 19:42:51 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
pacino....its not even a contest.
2007-03-09 19:45:44 · answer #1 · answered by Dovahkiin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like them both! But, Al Pacino gets it! He has been acting since the early 70's. So, of course he is going to have alot more experience as a professional actor and alot more crediability.
Pitt and Pacino have different acting styles and abilities depending on the type of films they choose to act in. I loved Pacino in Dog Day Afternoon, Serpico, Scarface, the God father, and Heat.
Pitt, I loved him in Troy! Ocean's Eleven, that was pretty good, not that great but, I'll give him an ok for that one. Besides, in most movies he play's a ladies man. Oh! he was also good in the movie Mr.& Mrs. Smith.
2007-03-10 01:00:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Comparing Al Pacino and Brad Pitt is like comparing Tom Hanks and Adam Sandler. Both are great at what they do, but are on two completely different levels. Al Pacino is definitely a better actor than Brad Pitt.
2007-03-09 22:47:05 · answer #3 · answered by ohioguy4jc 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would have to agree that Al Pacino is a better actor and that he has been in better movies, overall, than Brad Pitt. But, I think Brad Pitt is still getting better whereas Al Pacino may have peaked.
Also, it is often the availablity, or lack thereof, of good roles that allow an actor to rise up to his/her full potential. A recent case in point is Forest Whitaker. You might have caught glimpses of his potential in Platoon, Crying Game, Bird or Ghost Dog, but if the Idi Amin role hadn't been available or well-written, we may never have seen him hit this high-water mark.
The same goes for a lot of actors. I mean where has Meryl Streep been? She may be the best American actress there is but if the roles aren't there what can you do?
As far as Brad Pitt, I think most of his roles have been lacking in depth. But, I have really enjoyed some of these movies, too. (The Mexican, Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Legends Of The Fall, True Romance, Snatch, Twelve Monkeys, Joe Black, etc..). I haven't seen all of his films, but I sense he's been typecast through most of his career. His career seems to parallel Cary Grants, somehow. Perhaps there'll be a payoff before he burns out from the typecasting. I hope so.
Now, hmm, Al Pacino. I can't think of a role he's had that wasn't serious. Some may have been humorous, at times, but almost always with a darker intensity just waiting to erupt. I think the "lightest" film I've seen him in, I think, was Frankie And Johnny. Scent Of A Woman had it's moments but, taken as a whole, it was quite dramatic. (Even DeNiro did some decent comedy - King Of Comedy, Midnight Run, Brazil).
So, who can say how good an actor is if they aren't given good, let alone great roles to perform? How much does range count? Does a lack of intensity in a role necessarily reflect an actor's ability or could it simply reflect the lack of intensity in the character?
Personally, I used to think DiCaprio was more of a pretty boy than an actor. I have to admit, gladly, that he is proving me mistaken. (This is for Blood Diamond as well as The Departed, Catch Me If You Can, & Gangs Of New York - did okay in Romeo & Juliet, but how would a professional mis-interpret or mis-play that role?)
2007-03-09 23:38:21 · answer #4 · answered by ron w 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have to say that I don't really care for either BUT I have to say also that Al Pacino's Dog Day Afternoon is one of the better movies ever made as is Scent Of A Woman. Pitt did make one movie that I have seen and it was Legends Of the Fall and he was very good in that movie.
Both are highly touted and for me that is a turn off.
So I give Al the thumbs up as the better actor mostly because he had better material to workd with and Pitt has the trash of today.
2007-03-09 20:03:51 · answer #5 · answered by Bashful Reader 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Al Pacino
2007-03-10 00:21:22 · answer #6 · answered by mecarela 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is a rather unfair question I think. Comparing two actors who are not contemporaries is difficult. Al Pacino is a legend of course and should not be compared to Brad Pitt.
However, when compared to other actors of his own time and with his immense fan following, no one can accuse Brad Pitt of sticking to stereotypical roles. He has shown that he has range and can act, and is not just a good-looking face. He still has some way to go.How can you compare the two when they are so completely different?
2007-03-09 21:11:05 · answer #7 · answered by arb_princess 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Al Pacino, no doubt. It's hard to find an actor that you can compare with Al Pacino and Brad Pitt is nowhere near that.
2007-03-09 19:59:50 · answer #8 · answered by Deep Thought 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There's not even a comparison. Al Pacino is a fabulous actor.Extremely talented, instinctive, and most passionate.
Brad Pitt is getting better, but he still has a long way to go
2007-03-11 03:55:32 · answer #9 · answered by amelie 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Thats a No-Brainer. Al Pacino
2007-03-10 00:15:39 · answer #10 · answered by dagatedy_2000 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Al Pacino is better actor, but Pitt is pretty amazing himself considering he "hit it big" as some pretty boy in "Thelma and Louise".
Which are my favourite Brad Pitt movies?
Se7en, Fight club, True romance (I list it although his role is small here.), Twelve monkeys and Troy (Although it is histopricaly inaccurate.)
Which are my favourite Al Pacino movies?
Hmmmmm... just Donnie Brasco.
2007-03-09 19:51:49 · answer #11 · answered by celia3018 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋