I continually have this argument with my friends:

Who is better De Niro or Pacino?
BUT, that is admittedly too difficult to answer,
Sooo... who deserved the Oscar more in Pt. II, De Niro, or Pacino? I once read a review of GFII (The guy hated it so he can't be trusted, but he made some good points) that said that De Niro
"establishes the physical antecedents of the Brando character" but "lacks" the violent layers underneath.
I mean, when De Niro's character kills Don Cicci, he seems to be repelled by it, but at the same time enjoying it, with a sneer on his lips. That to me, seems to be more De Niro killing the guy, than the character, Don Corleone.

Pacino's character, on the other hand, when he does slap Kay, you know that he is Vito's son.

FFC talks about how if they couldn't get Brando as a young man, they could get De Niro to look like Vito. But, if the character of Vito is similar to Brando's own personality somewhat, then the way that Brando acted in Streetcar is more what i would expect of a young Vito.

I mean, young Vito is not a brute and insensative like Brando's Stanley Kowalski, but still...

Compare how Brando's Vito acts when he slaps Johnny and says, "You can act LIKE A MAN!!!" and when Vito kills Fanucci, and Cicci.

I dunno, i'm just ranting and raving, don't get me wrong, De Niro was AMAZING!!
But i think that Pacino was wrongly robbed by the idiots in the Academy (they made at least several good decisions by giving Oscars to Brando, Rota, FFC, and I and II though).

They almost acknowledged as much by giving Pacino an Oscar for "scent of a woman." Pacino was OK, but certainly not Oscar-worthy. It was like they were saying, "we know we snubbed you in the past, so here you go."

And the guy who got the Oscar for 1974 was for some film that hardly anyone knows, it was some no name random guy (correct me if I'm wrong).

Pacino's perf., esp. comes to lite in the bonus scenes, where he is lying in bed, incapcitated, etc.

:-)

Gosh, these 'who's better' topics annoy me....

Neither actor is better than the other; in the GF films, or in any other aspect of their careers. And...neither deserved the Oscar more than the other, it's just that DeNiro won in his category and Pacino did not. I think everyone expected Pacino to win, but for some reason (go ask the Academy voters), the award went to Art Carney (not exactly a 'no name randum guy'), for Harry & Tonto. Sometimes, people will vote for a person to acknowledge their career & not just the role for which they were nominated. Mr. Carney was VERY GOOD in Harry & Tonto, and at the time he's the one who got the most Best Actor votes; it's just that that film itself is classic that GFII is; and therefore is not watched or remembered as much.

Apple

They both suck.

De Niro all the way - it wasn't so much GF II but Taxi Driver and Raging Bull.

Its what he done for Raging Bull that was extremely impressive - he entered 3 boxing matcehd and won 2 - what a man

And Al Pacino was so much into character (playing a plain-clothes NYC cop) while filming 'Serpico' he actually pulled over and threatened to arrest a truck driver for exhaust pollution.

Nice goin', MFM!!!!

Apple

I agree with M4M! De Niro and Pacino? Whatta coupla hacks! It's SOFIA COPPOLA who shoula won the Oscar!

DE NIRO! HE KICKS EVERYONE'S ASS! No offense, but he's my favorite actor ever! HE IS THE SHIT!

Pacino is in a different league of De Niro. Look at Pacino's depth. He can play a Italian Mafia Kingpin, a Cuban Druglord, a hot-headed bi-sexual bankrobber, a Mephistophelean Lawyer, a blind war veteran, and an NYC cop. He made The Godfather into what it is today. Pacino came in as a newcomer and he held the movie up as much as Brando did.

Many of u are bringing up other movies in which these two have starred in....And this is all well and good but if the original question is who was better in GF II I have to go with pacino. I might be a little biuased because in my opinion he is the greatest actor that ever lived....but i just tought his performance was so mmuch more deep than deniro....I don't think that Deniro showed enough of the emotianl range that Vito possesed.

Pacino even though DeNiro's movies are better....

I would say that in part II I was more impressed by DeNiro. First of all, he did virtually the whole movie in Italian. Second of all, he had to play his character according to the blueprint that Brando had laid out in the first movie.

Pacino is still my favorite actor, but in part II, DeNiro was da bizzomb.

They were both equally excellent, but they were not their respective greatest acting performances. Pacino in Scent of a Woman, and De Niro in Raging Bull.

Oops - Moving to General Discussion...