DE NIRO vs PACINO vs DDL vs OLDMAN vs WASHINGTON

Didn't we have that poll before??

I usually say Pacino is my #1 of the currently working actors and Bobby is #2.

DDL would be my number 5 or 6 (although he's retired) and Denzel maybe one place below.

I always rank D. Hoffman and Hopkins in the top 4 since Nicholson's retirement and Tom Hanks is right up there with DDL.

Oldman is out of my top 10 (maybe he makes top 20 or something like that).

Late night boredom. Here goes.....


1. Pacino - Usually, I have him neck-and-neck between DeNiro, but more and more I'm feeling Pacino. People tend to forget that from Dog Day Afternoon thru Dick Tracy, he did one film that was that interesting... which was Scarface. That 15 year drought has to be taken into account (don't think anything he did in that 15 years is that interesting). However, by the time the 90s were rolling with new ideas, he was quickly back in the fray with 1 admirable film every year. He had Heat, Glengarry Glen Ross, Dick Tracy, Carlito's Way, Donnie Brasco, and The Insider. I think Donnie Brasco his best performance. The Insider no slouch. In Heat, while not his best - he was still a key reason for the legacy. So I think based on Pacino's superior works after 1995, he gets my current nod over DeNiro.  Pacino was still doing interesting movies even as late as 2004.

2. Oldman - Well...... DeNiro, Oldman, and Pacino are 3 of my top 7 actors of all time. So it's a very slight preference. I guess the fact that DeNiro got washed up after Heat really makes it hard to find new things from him after I get tired of watching his classics. Oldman and Pacino I can go digging for the "underrated" movies more where DeNiro pretty much everything relevant he's done is mostly seen.

3. DeNiro - Again, he's among my Top 7 actors and he's done more than enough for a lifetime, and preferences between Pacino/Oldman/DeNiro are very slight for me. I think the aspect that sets DeNiro apart is that his thuggish persona sometimes has a jagged edge over Pacino's intentional bad-muthufucka comic persona. DeNiro is still entertaining in performances that aren't considered his best. Pacino lesser so. Only Heat fits this bill from him. But its telling how DeNiro has been good for as many years as hes been bad. If he was good for 25 years from 1970-1995, he was bad for 25 years from 1996-2020. Actually technically he started a bit later in 1973 but I guess that's a minor oversight. Hes the cinematic equivalent of the Dallas Cowboys. In fact they have the exact identical timeline. Cowboys started sucking after the same year.... 1995, and they likewise started to make noise somewhere around 1970....heh.

4. DDL - Overrated in TWBB, but for his long haired heroine days like in The Last of the Mohicans and The Crucible, and then the crux of the legacy, which to me, occurred in 2002.... Gangs of New York, I'd have him over Washington. Washington has a far greater sample of films to keep adding and building to my interest level, but each one of DDL's works feel so special and carry more weight. Don't get the obsession with him in In the Name of the Father though. I need to see Lincoln and Phantom Thread.

5. Washington - He's #5 but I still like him a lot. He recently put a sour spot in my mouth after a Training Day rewatch revealed staleness, but Man on Fire I hold to the highest esteem here probably, outside of pupdurcs. We're the only 2 that sees his brilliance there. I rank it on the same tier as some of DDL's and DeNiro's works. Denzel is a very good entertainer, but I don't think he's quite a favorite like the first 3. And he lacks a signature distinction of DDL though I wouldn't call DDL a favorite either.

Where's Willem Dafoe? He's on fire!

This depends on how you interpret "working actors". If you say it's just any actor that still makes movies, regardless of how good he was over the last decade, it's still Al Pacino, who's my #2 actor of all time, just ahead of Robert DeNiro (my #3).
But if you consider quality of recent performances important as in "actors who put out great work over the last one or two decades" out of this group I'd go with Day-Lewis. Though, Lincoln aside, his best work was between 1989 and 2002 (haven't seen Phantom Thread). Though there might be some others I'd place ahead of him over the last 10 or 20 years. But of those five he would usually be the one, of whom as of today I'd expect the most of a performance.

The poll we did before was Pacino (who won) vs. DDL (2nd) vs. Washington (3rd with half the votes) - this was pre-2019 films so Pacino stretched his lead - in our GOAT poll it was Pacino (1) Day-Lewis (3) De Niro (4) etc.

Pacino really is the post-Brando GOAT and if he's not that then it's De Niro or Nicholson - I "could" make a case for them at least.....Day-Lewis is an all-timer but like I always say what he did acting wise in a whole career Pacino rivals in just his first 5 years in film......... I can never really argue him over Pacino personally - he doesn't have enough work or variety of work......Oldman is great but he has less than Day-Lewis imo.

Which gets us to Denzel Washington who I really am a big fan of I really am - I've seen all his filmed work and onstage a lot - more than anyone I know of on here - but I'm going to do something special - for once I'm going to specifically list why he could never be ranked ahead of Pacino to me and that even goes for right now too.

Pacino has always topped Washington - though I will say that right now he's capable of doing better work at 65+ than Pacino but he's been lesser for 30+ years and that's a lot to make up.

********************************************************************************************************************

At worst Pacino's within the top 5 American film actors ever and Washington at best is within the top ~15 - as of right now. 

Washington has a couple unique things over Pacino but they are mostly peripheral to actual acting:

His box-office appeal, co-producing Fences to an Oscar nod and directing Viola Davis to an Oscar win for example. Related to acting specifically he has one more Oscar win - and he'll win a 3rd one day, he will - but he still just comes up short for too many years in too many spots:

Awards don't matter (at all) but just to frame the differences between them:

Washington finally equaled Pacino's Oscar nods in 2017 - after not catching him for 30+ years of his career - he now trails by him by 1. 

Washington has just half of Pacino's Golden Globe nods - 18 to 9 (!)  - with 0 nods for GG comedy acting and with 2 fewer wins too. 

Washington famously has zero BAFTA nods - that's 6 less than Pacino - with 1 fewer win. 

Pacino has 3 more Emmy nods and 2 more Emmy wins.  

On stage - Pacino has 1 more Tony nod with 1 more Tony win. 

But even if you forget about all that - Pacino wins in comedic work (clearly here, objectively), and at absolute highest peak dramatic work and the amount of special work imo. He outpaces him in Best Picture nodded films or if you prefer even in the amount of just iconic films overall. 

He's worked with more top level directors and did more diverse types of acting too - with several great ensembles, and with better co-stars also.

....................It's just too much for any of them to compete with really.

Hanks will be thought of as the GOAT one day imo ................which is weird to me because he's at best the 3rd best actor of his generation - maybe BUT: 

He can compete in awards with anyone........  there's nothing "exotic" about him to turn people off - people just love him - there is nothing "niche" about him, he's got big comedy successes, a ton of classic films and "family" classics which is a big thing AND he plays everyday people that audiences recognize from their real life.........he's going to get nodded this year, maybe win a 3rd Best Actor............. I don't think he'll finish much behind Washington in Oscar nods.......he did theater decently even.......

I always say to rate actors it helps to have a checklist and see who wins and he checks off a ton of boxes despite some thinking he's too nice or anything negative you could possibly say about him even. If he isn't thought of as the GOAT "actor" 50 years from now........he'll eventually be thought of as the greatest "star" I figure at least.

They’re amazing all-timers so I’ll just vote for my favorite. DeNiro

Imo he's the greatest of his generation by far. One of the most consistent actors.

I'm an avowed fan of Hanks, but even I will admit that his lack of a truly dark role does hinder him somewhat when judging him for his range (although to be fair, one of his Cloud Atlas characters is extremely monstrous and it's rarely mentioned because that character's only on-screen for a max of ten minutes). It's why I'm very keen to see his take on Colonel Tom Parker, who was an extremely flawed individual to say the least.

But yeah, he needs his Henry Fonda in Once Upon a Time in the West moment. Something that makes audiences stand up in utter shock in the theater.

I will never understand this board at all.........Tom Hanks wouldn't make my top _____ actors. I straight up will tell you he's not my kind of actor. Period.

But not having a dark side (and I agree he doesn't yet) doesn't hurt him more than Denzel Washington and DDL having no fncking light side to champion (they can do comedy but come on this is a huge gap in their screen resumes for actors at their level).

Tommen doesn't care, he says (rightfully) "DDL is in my top 5" and that's fine and similarly to the average person Hanks has pulled off dark in The Road to Perdition - not to me and weak film too imo - but his darkside, or lack thereof won't hurt him years later - people just like what they like regardless.

AND he has the darkside role in the can anyway as Col. Parker...........actors go through stages:

De Niro wasn't funny on film at all until 45 and again until his late 50s.......Pacino didn't try Shakespeare on film until 56.........Washington hasn't tried a Shakespeare lead (Macbeth) until 65.........Hanks will go dark again at 64 etc. You gotta keep the whole thing in perspective if you're ranking actors on best rather than those you find dreamy or whatever -  people randomly give one attribute way too much importance in the bigger picture I mean fnck Pacino better do a Western soon or I'm dropping him to #2

..........Hanks is missing one thing ok - but it's not like most GOAT contenders who are missing several obvious things that we just let slide entirely........and like I said he checks off a ton of boxes, no one checks all.........

I agree he's missing a dark side role in his career but in my mind all of them have a lack of something. Important to some people, not necessary to others.

Although he indeed was somewhat dark in Road to Perdition, he has never chosen a "really bad guy" part but this hasn't hurt him at all imo. I'd love to see him in much more roles outside his comfort zone but still, he's great inside that zone!!!

One could argue Denzel's career lacks of a really comedic performance, De Niro's missing a Shakespearian part,  DDL has always played it safe (not exactly, but you get what I mean) and so on. (if you notice, Pacino's career has no lack of anything   Kidding... )

I respect the argument but I don't really mind. I know that when I get to watch a DDL movie, his performance will be electrifying, as usual. Will he be in his comfort zone? So what!! I enjoy what I see.

Plus, I judge the actors mainly by what I see of them, not that much by what I haven't seen. 

How does a Frenchie of all people leave Daniel Auteuil off a list of greatest working actors?!