Sorry Klemmer, But Robert De Niro Is NOT Our Greatest Living Actor

Yesterday, Chris Klemmer wrote a blog power ranking the ten greatest living actors. Usually, I wouldn't say I like it when people go through and dissect lists. Every list is subjective. Klemmer is more than welcome to put De Niro at number one, but as somebody who respects Chris's opinion a fair amount, I figured I'd just provide something of a devil's advocate here. I'm not making an old-age joke because Klemmer gets enough of those, but he is a bit older than me and comes from a different generation. I've said this before, but as somebody who is a 28-year-old male, the Robert De Niro films that I've grown up on aren't exactly ones that make you think, "Oh shit, this is our finest living actor."

Robert De Niro is NOT overrated. Robert De Niro is not undeserving of every ounce of success he's achieved throughout his storied career. You could easily argue that he belongs near the top of that list simply because of his influence as an actor. If you go back and watch movies from the 50s and 60s, the acting kind of sucks. I love watching a lot of the "Twilight Zone" episodes, but they're good because of the ideas and the storylines. You rarely get subtlety from those actors. Marlon Brando kind of set the precedent for what modern acting could look like. If he paved the way, then guys like Pacino and De Niro set the standard. But I think Pacino and De Niro both suffer from the same problem. They've taken on too many roles in the latter part of their career that they never had to take.

If you're somebody like me, who's under 30, the version of Robert De Niro that you're accustomed to is the Robert De Niro that plays the wacky grandpa in comedies. Yes, he bounces back every several years with a phenomenal dramatic performance. This year, he's been critically claimed for his performance in "Killers of the Flower Moon." In 2019, he was excellent in "The Irishman." In 2012, he was nominated for best supporting actor for "Silver Linings Playbook." He hasn't lost his fastball, but I feel like he throws his overspeed stuff way too much. Leonardo DiCaprio ranked second on Klemmer's list. While I think De Niro is a superior actor, there is something about an actor like DiCaprio, who has very few misses. Since 2000, De Niro has been very hit-and-miss. For every "Killers of the Flower Moon," there's a "Rocky and Bullwinkle." For every "Silver Linings Playbook," there's a "Dirty Grandpa." Not only are these movies bad, but he's bad in them. 

So, if I'm going to sit in my ivory tower and claim that Robert De Niro isn't the best living actor, then who is? It might be slightly unfair, but the answer is Daniel Day-Lewis. It's unfair because he's so selective with his projects. The guy retires for eight years, comes out of retirement, wins an Oscar, and then the cycle repeats. He hasn't been in many movies, but it's an event every time he is. He can throw himself into every role. But he's not consistently working. Christian Bale's longevity also puts him near the top of the list. Regarding actors who consistently work, I think you could argue that he's the best. 

This gets me thinking: Who are the actors from this generation that will talk about the way that De Niro and Pacino are talked about today? The first that comes to mind is Adam Driver. Martin Scorsese, a guy who knows a thing or two about making movies, has called Driver perhaps the finest actor of his generation. He's definitely somebody capable of lifting the "Star Wars" curse. He made all the money he needed to make from those movies, and now he's been able to be selective with his projects and really stretch himself. His performance in "Marriage Story" is one of my favorites of the last decade.

If we're talking about modern movie stars, Ryan Gosling will be one of those actors who will receive a Lifetime Achievement award at the Oscars 30 years from now. He's an actor who has no problem turning himself into a meme; his performance in "Barbie" was a prime reflection of that, but he has very few misses. His 2010s decade featured the best filmography of any actor. He's also proven himself to be a dynamite performer, both dramatically and comedically. 

The last one that I could see being on a list like this 30 or 40 years from now will be the most controversial one of the bunch, but I think Robert Pattinson is putting together one hell of a résumé. I feel like so much of the mainstream either know him as the kid from "Twilight" or Batman, but sandwiched in between is a decade of him choosing really interesting projects. I think his performance in "Good Time" is one of the best performances in any movie. Like, I'm not kidding about that. People from my generation will always use "Twilight" against him, but I feel like Pattinson's arc is very similar to Johnny Depp in the 90s. Johnny Depp started as a teenage heartthrob in the 80s when he was on "21 Jump Street" and became one of his generation's more versatile actors. I feel like Pattinson is going through something similar right now.

It's interesting to talk about. I recommend everybody go read Klemmer's blog. There's really no wrong ranking. I'm probably a contrarian once again. Most people will agree with Klemmer, but De Niro's inconsistency with his projects over the last 25 years or so knocks him down to peg for me. I know that we lament not seeing Joe Pesci in many projects nowadays. Still, he preserved his legacy by staying semi-retired instead of taking projects where he would've become a parody of himself. De Niro is a legend. This is not a knock against him; it's just a slight difference of opinion.