ROTTEN TOMATOES: Scorsese, DiCaprio Reuniting for Shutter Island Comments

Scorsese, DiCaprio Reuniting for Shutter Island

by Jeff Giles | October 23, 2007

Summary

Their first three collaborations netted copious amounts of Oscar love and box-office receipts, so it isn't surprising that Martin Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio are in no hurry to stop working together -- or that 2008 will find DiCaprio starring in his fourth Scorsese film. Back to Article

(21-40 of 44 posts) | Reply

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Oct 23 2007 02:44 PM

rt_hire_me

I barely 'remember' those scenes primarily because Dicaprio is so forgettable. I'm not saying Dicaprio is 100% incapable of turning in a good performance (Catch Me If You Can & Gilbert Grape are excellent examples)...but he's not even comparable to the Scorsese/Deniro union that made those early films from Marty timeless...

You might have the image of Dicaprio's naked silhouette etched into your retinas for very different reasons than most...who's to say?

I will agree with you that Dicaprio is giving Scorsese exactly what he wants (hence all the collaborations). I just think Scorsese isn't asking as much from his male muses anymore, primarily because Dicaprio isn't capable of delivering performances on par with a Deniro, or even a Pesci.

What happened to Gilbert Grape? He's doing decent work as an actor for a very amazing director...

(Reply to this)

walkingdead09 writes:
on Oct 23 2007 03:06 PM

So in that movie what was eating gilbert grape? His mom was eating everything, I thought.

(Reply to this)

MadDog82 writes:
on Oct 23 2007 03:42 PM

The book wasn't very good.

(Reply to this)

Spurple writes:
on Oct 23 2007 04:14 PM

In reply to this comment (#1217045)
let me see if I get this Bro, you don't like DiCaprio because he isn't acting as well as Robert DeNiro, one of the greatest actors of all time? Give me a break! Anyone who tries to talk bad about one actors abilities by comparing him to another is stupid. Judge Leo based on Leo, not based on DeNiro.

If you honestly don't see Leo as one of the finest actors working today, then you seriously have a terrible judge of talent. Too many people are still hating on him from his teen-heart throb Titanic and Romeo Juliet days. He is an amazingly skilled actor. You seriously don't think he was memorable in Blood Diamond, and you think his performance in Catch me if you Can was better then that? Really man, you are just bad at judging acting.

(Reply to this)

lilheclou writes:
on Oct 23 2007 05:30 PM

again for the 4th time cool and leo is great actor

(Reply to this)

rt_hire_me writes:
on Oct 23 2007 07:00 PM

In reply to this comment (#1217045)
"You might have the image of Dicaprio's naked silhouette etched into your retinas for very different reasons than most...who's to say?"

You know what was really assaulting my consciousness? The pee. I was sure someone was going to come in and kick over the bottles.

(Reply to this)

Dr. Evol writes:
on Oct 23 2007 10:09 PM

lol...lots of fun comments in here.
Although I cant agree with you �Bro� about DiCaprio, he is a great actor and I�m pretty sure Sean Penn would be pissed off at you for saying that he�s incapable of delivering a performance. I�ve Been a fan since he did �Basketball Diaries�, I even think he should�ve been nominated in that movie. And while you�re at your anti-DiCaprio campagne why dont you tell us how Scorsese�s �latter movies are made for the sake of Oscar gold� Dont you think he happens to be a great filmmaker? You said he was a very amazing director.

(Reply to this)

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Oct 24 2007 02:11 AM

In reply to this comment (#1217267)
Spurple

%u201CAnyone who tries to talk bad about one actors abilities by comparing him to another is stupid.%u201D

Disagree. And if you knew anything about the basics of film critiquing, or if you ever read any of the reviews from today%u2019s leading film critics available here at Rotten Tomatoes, you would see how many of them would also disagree with your claim. Comparisons between one actor and another for the same director are made all the time...just take a gander once in a while.

You must%u2019ve missed my point of argument in my earlier posts but to clarify, I%u2019m not as happy with the Dicaprio/Scorsese union as I am with the Deniro/Scorsese union.

I never said Dicaprio was a crap actor or that I hated him for 'Titanic' or 'R&J'. In point of fact, I think Dicaprio is a decent actor who makes good movies.

'Blood Diamond' was a great film, but at no point in the film was it even remotely believable that Dicaprio could manhandle Djimon Hounsou%u2026and don%u2019t get me started on how many times he mangled a South African accent. Besides I think there%u2019s a far greater arc for Dicaprio%u2019s character in 'CMIYC' than there is in 'BD,' but that is merely my opinion.

(Reply to this)

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Oct 24 2007 02:27 AM

In reply to this comment (#1217910)
Dr. Evol you wrote:

I�m pretty sure Sean Penn would be pissed off at you for saying that he�s incapable of delivering a performance.

Uh 'Bro' re-read my original post, because I actually said the opposite.

And while you're at it, re-read everything else I've written because it's not exactly an Anti-Dicaprio campaign...and I would think that any leading actor in Hollywood today would be honored to be even compared with Deniro's finest film work, which is what I've been doing. I also covered the Oscar Gold topic in there as well, so you should probably just re-read everything if you're seriously looking for an explanation from me.

Take a gander at Francis Ford Coppola's interview where he recently asserted that:

I think if there was a role that De Niro was hungry for, he would come after it.

I just don't think collaborators like Marty Scorsese are offering him challenging roles anymore. So we've got the Scorsese/Dicaprio union right now. And despite Scorsese's acumen, does anyone really think that Deniro's efforts for Raging Bull are commensurate with Dicaprio's efforts for Aviator or Gangs? Or are comparisons of two actors for the same director merely stupid?

(Reply to this)

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Oct 24 2007 02:30 AM

In reply to this comment (#1217437)
Dude, you're right! I was wondering about the pee in the bottles too!

(Reply to this)

DariusVIII writes:
on Oct 24 2007 12:06 PM

In reply to this comment (#1216890)
Yeah man, to say Leo is a facial actor is just ludacris. Watch What's Eating Gilbert Grape, and then tell me he's a facial actor. And I've seen Raging Bull/Taxi Driver/Goodfellas and I've seen The Aviator/The Departed and I think that Marty's standards and craft have stayed the same, if not gotten better. He has bigger budgets, more freedom. Yes, The Aviator was total Oscar bait, but it was also one of the best movies I've ever seen. I thought Leo became Hughes just as much as Foxx became Ray that year. So I respectfully but strongly disagree. Also, I think in another 20 years, The Aviator and The Departed will be just as classic to people grew up with them as Raging Bull and Taxi Driver are to the older generations today.

(Reply to this)

DariusVIII writes:
on Oct 24 2007 12:18 PM

Everyone has their own opinion. Leo is one of my favorite actors. And De Niro is awesome, but he isn't spectacular in every movie he's in. No one is. Everyone has flaws. But Leo, compared to most working today, is in the top tier, no doubt about it.

(Reply to this)

Dr. Evol writes:
on Oct 24 2007 06:56 PM

In reply to this comment (#1218101)
You have a good point �Bro� but I was merely being sarcastic. Still I don�t think it�s fair to compare DeNiro and DiCaprio just on the basis of being under Scorsese. Both actors have different characters on different type of movies. DeNiro on Taxi Driver and Raging Bull, DeNiro was fantastic in both of them and also in those movies we only focus very intensely on him especially with voice over we are allowed to know his thoughts, which makes his character powerful, DeNiro had the space and material to improvise and create his "Are you talking to me?". Whereas The Departed is more of an ensemble movie, Howard Hughes is well known figure which means DiCaprio is more restricted in some parts and still pulled an amazing part. So I won�t agree comparing DeNiro/DiCaprio, especially when you say "Dicaprio doesn't 'inhabit' the souls of his characters in the way Deniro does"
I know he�s not labeled as Scorsese�s muse but would you like to compare Daniel Day Lewis�s performance in Age of Innocence and Gangs of New York?

"I think if there was a role that De Niro was hungry for, he would come after it."

Agree, which is why you wont see me hacking on Deniro for choosing less meatier characters today that is not "on par" with his earlier movie like Taxi Driver
we know he�s solid or even compare with DiCaprio�s latest movies and then say "he doesn�t inhabit his characters the way DiCaprio does".
Quid pro quo I do think DeNiro is a better actor than DiCaprio.

(Reply to this)

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Oct 25 2007 02:42 AM

In reply to this comment (#1218827)
"I think that Marty's standards and craft have stayed the same, if not gotten better."

I respectfully disagree. One man's opinion to another.

(Reply to this)

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Oct 25 2007 02:53 AM

In reply to this comment (#1219367)
"I know he�s not labeled as Scorsese�s muse..."

Actually, I would say that Dicaprio IS Scorsese's cinematic muse for the moment.
The Deniro/Scorsese union was a pioneering one at that. The characters Deniro inhabited (yes, inhabited) were unprecedented in cinema. The films that Scorsese directed during that union were and still are classics. Deniro gained 60 pounds to play Lamotta? You telling me that 'booger-in-a-stick' Dicaprio is equally committed to make a transformation to inhabit a character? I gotta say...I have my doubts...

You're very right about 'The Departed', it was n ensemble piece. And very little about that film was pioneering-quality. It's a phenomenal film in its own right, but its also a remake (marvelously appropriated into a Boston setting which was genius)...but it wasn't a 'pioneering' endeavor for me. As an ensemble piece, 'Goodfellas' was far and away better.

I know that Dicaprio tried to channel the spirit of Hughes in his performance. (Ian Holm's recent autobiography--an excellent read--reported that Leo mandated that the cast and crew refer to him as 'Howard' on set at all times...something that Holm thought ridiculous). And you're right, he was restricted in what he could do with the part. But as a cinematic biopic, it's an alright film. Pioneering? Doubt it. Groundbreaking? It doesn't resonate that way with me. Enjoyable, yes. A good film to watch. But certainly not Marty's best work.

We agree, Deniro is a better actor, but I believe it's because Scorsese offered him meatier roles and then let Deniro 'flesh' out the character(s). He's not exactly offering the same 'meat' to Dicaprio in my opinion...

(Reply to this)

Dr. Evol writes:
on Oct 25 2007 12:33 PM

Yes indeed DiCaprio is Scorsese�s muse but not Daniel Day-Lewis who I was referring to.

Does it require DiCaprio to put 60 pounds on Scorsese�s movies? No, but he does put souls into his characters that�s what I�ve been trying to say, primarily that�s where we are disagreeing weither Scorsese�s movie are groundbreaking/pioneering now or then(different topic)
Earlier you agreed on that DiCaprio does what everything Scorsese ask of him, what does that tell you? Will he put weight on his future films? I cant answer that because that depends on which roles he chooses.

"We agree, Deniro is a better actor, but I believe it's because Scorsese offered him meatier roles and then let Deniro 'flesh' out the character(s). He's not exactly offering the same 'meat' to Dicaprio in my opinion... "

yes I think I point that out on #1219367 in which I said it wouldn�t be fair to compare yet...union for union.

(Reply to this)

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Oct 25 2007 02:54 PM

In reply to this comment (#1221108)
"Earlier you agreed on that DiCaprio does what everything Scorsese ask of him, what does that tell you?"

This discussion has now become elliptical, which is good. Because, in the end, the source of this topic dealt with whether Scorsese is now making better films with Dicaprio than he did with Deniro.

Some may indicate that the latter collaboration can be found in the evidence of Scorsese's Golden Statuette for his most recent film. But the acquisition of 'Oscars' is a slippery-fish and as true fans of film we know that nominations are frequently not the validation of 'Best' in cinema.

I think Dicaprio does what Scorsese asks him to do...and that his skills as an actor in his own right are manifestly less-inspired and less-demanding than those of the films acted by Deniro and directed by Marty.

Which means this: Scorsese is doing less character-driven films and I think that the capability of his current muse informs those directing choices.

More specifically, to answer your question, I think that what this tells me is that Scorsese is not selecting film projects that are as demanding or character-driven as his earlier films with Deniro.

Besides, no, I don't think Dicaprio could put on 60 lbs to play a part for Scorsese (and neither do I think Scorsese would settle on a pic that would ask his actor to do so unless he were working with Christian Bale).

Ultimately, it begs the question "Does the actor influence the artist/director, or does the director influence the artist?"...

I believe it's possible that his earlier work with Deniro...it was a little of both, and his latter work with Dicaprio is less so.

Just one man's opinion...

(Reply to this)

Dr. Evol writes:
on Oct 25 2007 05:43 PM

no it doesn�t have to imply into �our� discussion because what I was referring to have relivance to the topic we are discussing about, but since we�re on it yeah I can diffinitely agree with you that Oscars doesn�t always pick the best of the year and Marty should have won an oscar on his earlier movies that would justify him and not have to "compete" with himself on his own earlier better movies but if you look at what Departed competed with for best picture/director:
Little Miss Sunshine/United 93
The Queen
Letters From Iwo Jima
Babel
Out of curiousity which one would you pick? I think The Departed is on top in both categories if not 2nd (look what happened between saving private ryan and shakespeare in love..my 2 cents).

"Besides, no, I don't think Dicaprio could put on 60 lbs to play a part for Scorsese (and neither do I think Scorsese would settle on a pic that would ask his actor to do so unless he were working with Christian Bale)."

I think I�m more open-minded ragarding what you wrote there, just because we�ve seen Bale become extremely thin you�re disclosing DiCaprio�s willingness? In which movie should Bale put his extra 60 pounds where DiCaprio acted in: Gangs of New York, Aviator or Departed? Like I said different movies, different characters different actors, both Scorsese and DiCaprio do the project that inspires them otherwise what�s the point? Let�s not go in circles, I�m sorry you feel that DiCaprio is only a facial actor who �just furrows his brow and speaks his lines through gritted teet�.

(Reply to this)

Don't Tase Me Bro writes:
on Oct 26 2007 02:41 AM

In reply to this comment (#1222201)
"Out of curiousity which one would you pick?"

Actually, I would've gone with 'Little Miss Sunshine', but maybe that's because I'd already seen 'Infernal Affairs' and its sequel/prequel and was already a fan BEFORE Scorsese appropriated it into an American backdrop.

But it's very close to call and to have two polar opposite films competing for the top prize, it's almost as moot (you might say) as comparing apples to oranges, or Deniro to Dicaprio, but the Academy nominated and made a decision between two totally different films, from two totally different genres.

"I think I�m more open-minded ragarding what you wrote there, just because we�ve seen Bale become extremely thin you�re disclosing DiCaprio�s willingness? In which movie should Bale put his extra 60 pounds where DiCaprio acted in: Gangs of New York, Aviator or Departed? Like I said different movies, different characters different actors, both Scorsese and DiCaprio do the project that inspires them otherwise what�s the point?"

I think you're missing my point. I wasn't referring to Dicaprio's unwillingness, but rather his physical capability. You're ready to put Dicaprio onto the same tier and acumen as Deniro--despite your earlier post where you reveal:

"Quid pro quo I do think DeNiro is a better actor than DiCaprio."

In what way, may I ask, is Deniro a "better actor than Dicaprio"? Could you clarify?

I wholeheartedly agree with you if you still feel this way. I think Deniro a far more more capable actor PHYSICALLY...and I think Dicaprio doesn't command the physical presence on screen that Deniro can and does so wonderfully. This is why I think that Dicaprio's greatest acting asset is his face...furrowed eyebrow(s), gritted teeth and all.

But back to my previous point; I think you've missed it. Scorsese WOULD NOT select a film that required his marquee actor to make the kind of physical transformation that he used to make with Deniro.

You list Gangs of New York, Aviator and Departed...and in all of these films a ostensible physical transformation of Dicaprio is not necessary. Hence my argument: The last 3 films with Dicaprio do not require a physical transformation...and (man this is sounding like a broken record now) this is because I don't feel that Scorsese is selecting films for Dicaprio to play that require a serious physical commitment on par with his earlier work with Deniro.

Again, I'd like to hear your opinion on Deniro being a better actor than Dicaprio...please explain...

(Reply to this)

Dr. Evol writes:
on Oct 26 2007 12:11 PM

In reply to this comment (#1223452)
"You telling me that 'booger-in-a-stick' Dicaprio is equally committed to make a transformation to inhabit a character? I gotta say...I have my doubts..."

Yes I think he is equally committed for a tranformation for a character, you just don�t see it (you�ve only have to see it through DeNiro/Bale to know), would DiCaprio play La Motta better? No hence...here I quote again "Quid pro quo I do think DeNiro is a better actor than DiCaprio" When I say that it doesn�t mean DiCaprio lacked souls in the characters he plays in Scorsese�s (again that�s where we disagree) the way he did with DeNiro. Why don�t we compare DeNiro�s New York, New York and King of Comedy performance with DiCaprio�s 2 last movies with Scorcese? Do you see my point?

DeNiro LaMotta= Perfect fit, a character something DeNiro have once said that he can personally identify with, just the way DiCaprio is a perfect for Hughes(not facially but do you care? wait you�re only distracted with his face instead his body of work and was very �forgettable�), which he "commanded physical on screen presence wonderfully" To you in order to accept/see his wonderful perfomance he have to go extreme measures physically that doesn�t actually require him to do so.
Just as much as we know that Bale can play Batman better than DeNiro and DiCaprio...well one mans opinion.

"You list Gangs of New York, Aviator and Departed...and in all of these films a ostensible physical transformation of Dicaprio is not necessary. Hence my argument: The last 3 films with Dicaprio do not require a physical transformation..."

yes I listed those 3 movies to make a point (" unless he were working with Bale").. that you keep coming back to. And I did say he doesn�t require does kind of physical transformation the way DeNiro did in those movies, that was MY argument to make a point, still the fact is DiCaprio is equally committed physically and psychologically for the part and I can still say DeNiro is a better actor which you can see on Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Deer Hunter (where he makes `This is This� to a great line) etc.
While I know in New York, New York/King of Comedy he put the same effort but do you think he shines out the way he did with Taxi Driver and Raging Bull?

There is where you get blurry:

On Spurple�s reply you said DiCaprio is a decent actor who makes good movies, then you go on to say Blood diamond is a great film(ok im open-minded maybe you meant his other movies). And decent actor = so forgettable? Maybe you�re just being friendly?

Also
%u201CI barely 'remember' those scenes primarily because Dicaprio is so forgettable. I'm not saying Dicaprio is 100% incapable of turning in a good performance%u2026..You might have the image of Dicaprio's naked silhouette etched into your retinas for very different reasons than most...who's to say?%u201D

So when that was explained, your reaction:
%u201CDude, you're right! I was wondering about the pee in the bottles too!%u201D

Since we know Hughes has bacterial phobia, your reaction surprised me, it must mean DiCaprio�s performance worked espacially when you put exclamation marks, I doubt I would call that %u201CSo forgettable%u201D.

(Reply to this)