best film: Apocalypse Now is the second best film of all-time and since Brando isn’t in The Searchers (#1) it’s the choice here even with The Godfather looming closely behind (also in the top 10). Brando has been in three masterpieces, the third, and weakest of the three, is On the Waterfront from Elia Kazan. Brando’s work in Apocalypse Now is the least of the three performances here amongst his masterpieces. It’s a great Harry Lime-character. Welles, who played Lime in The Third Man, says it’s a character who is talked about, infamous, revered the entire film and then shows up for a scene or two at the end. Brando’s work as Colonel Walter E. Kurtz is genius and worthy of such a buildup in one of the two greatest films ever made. Thank God Coppola had Brando to go to for those scenes.
best performance: On the Waterfront. With On the Waterfront and A Streetcar Named Desire Brando changed film acting. He’s preceded by Montgomery Clift in regards to Method and predated by Paul Muni as far as transforming for a role (and you could argue Lon Cheney before that)—but nobody did it better and had the impact on the medium and craft Brando did. His instinctual acting in On the Waterfront is still revelatory today, over 60 years later. His improvising with Eve Marie Saint, the physical and emotional tour-de-force throughout, and the final speech to Rod Steiger in the back of the car at the end (copied in Raging Bull and Boogie Nights among others) show a virtuoso at work.
stylistic innovations/traits: Brando is the actor I’m most comfortable unequivocally calling a genius and an artist. He’s the most talented actor of all-time and if that’s all that mattered for this list- -then he would be at the #1 slot. Brando’s resume is another story. If you look at the five pictures on this page it’s insurmountably strong. He’s in, and sets the screen ablaze in, two of the best 10 films of all-time (Apocalypse Now, The Godfather). He’s in two of the best 10 performances of the 50’s (Streetcar, On the Waterfront), two of the best 10 performances of the 70’s (Last Tango, Godfather). These five films are as strong as it gets. It’s beyond that it starts to get shaky. There is really only 5-6 years where I’m mentioning Brando amongst the best performances of the year—that’s about half of the others in my top 5 actors on this list. #6-10 on his list below cannot contend with his peers on this list. Brando has 21 overall films in the archives which is respectable, but he was often disinterested in his career, throwing away almost an entire decade (the 1960’s) in his prime. He’s a fascinating solo artist in a lot of films that ended up outside of their respective year’s top 25 (The Missouri Breaks, Guys and Dolls, Sayonara). Brando broke onto the scene in 1950 and his first 6 films are archiveable. Something happened with On the Waterfront (I’ve read he felt betrayed by Kazan who used the film as a defense for his HUAC actions). Brando clearly lost interest, largely, in doing great work for the better part of two decades until he was revived by his masterpiece collaboration with Coppola. Brando’s disinterest and apathy clearly shows in his choices and filmography. I adore Brando, and will probably argue with myself about him not being #1 on this list whenever I’m watching one of those five landmark films/performances.
directors worked with: Kazan (3), Coppola (2) and these are the key collaborators. Mankiewicz (2), Penn (2) and then once with Bertolucci to great acclaim and once with Lumet
Top 10 Performances:
- On the Waterfront
- The Godfather
- A Streetcar Named Desire
- The Last Tango in Paris
- Apocalypse Now
- The Wild One
- The Fugitive Kind
- Julius Caesar
- The Young Lions
- Burn!
Archiveable films
| 1950- The Men |
| 1951- A Streetcar Named Desire |
| 1952- Vita Zapata |
| 1953- Julius Caesar |
| 1953- The Wild One |
| 1954- On the Waterfront |
| 1955- Guys and Dolls |
| 1957- Sayonara |
| 1958- The Young Lions |
| 1960- The Fugitive Kind |
| 1961- One-Eyed Jacks |
| 1964- Morituri |
| 1966- The Chase |
| 1969- Burn |
| 1972- The Godfather |
| 1972- The Last Tango In Paris |
| 1976- The Missouri Breaks |
| 1978- Superman: The Movie |
| 1979- Apocalypse Now |
| 1989- A Dry White Season |
| 1990- The Freshman |
« Something happened with On the Waterfront »
His mother died in 54’.
@KidCharlemagne . Interesting. Thanks for sending. I should pick up a good Brando biography. I do think there’s something about him feeling betrayed by Kazan. It’s nuts that they would never work together again after this.
A similar question to the one I asked you a couple of days ago on James Stewart and Cary grants pages, but how do you think Brando would be in the lead roles for Lawrence of Arabia,Ben-Hur, One flew over the Cuckoos Nest, and The Conversation?
@Randy— tough ones. I think some better than others. I mean Brando is probably the most talented actor of all-time. At the right age I’d love to see him in these– probably least of which is Lawrence of Arabia. It just seems the least well-suited to Brando of the four of them.
You may already know this, Drake, but I believe Randy mentioned Lawrence of Arabia due to the fact that Brando was heavily considered for the role, but he decided to do Mutiny on the Bounty instead because he preferred swimming in Tahiti to getting dehydrated on a camel.
I do really wonder, though, what he would be like. Needless to say, his performance would be VERY different from Peter O’Toole’s, which is one of the top five performances of all time… but then Marlon Brando also happens to be the most talented actor of all time. I suppose Brando would eschew O’Toole’s rather odd word timing and pleasant nonchalance and opt for a sort of “discovering his power as he goes along” T.E. Lawrence. However he might have played the character and however successful it might have been, I feel like taking that role would have totally changed the course of his career and I think it would lead him to a successful 1960’s which could give him the filmography required for being the #1 performer ever.
The Conversation I think could work, considering movies like Last Tango around that time where he did sort of stoic, unsympathetic sensitivity… but then it’s like Lawrence too: Gene Hackman is simply perfect there. I think it’s up there with the best performances of the 70s, so I don’t want anyone else to do it. Cuckoo’s Nest is a very difficult role, and he would definitely be at least good, but he was just a little too old and lacking some of the energy and electricity required of Nicholson’s masterful performance. Ben-Hur is the most difficult for me to write about. I suppose he would be really good, but the way I bet he would do it would completely shift the mood of the whole film. Heston’s character is sort of a stony mystery who you wouldn’t expect to be very nice, but one who ends up doing beneficial deeds. I feel that the point of the movie was that anyone can create “good” in the world no matter what befalls them, whereas Brando I think would present him as rather normal man who becomes more and more unusual as he experiences all of the social castes around him.
@Graham – good stuff here- thanks for sharing. I think the best actors are probably offered almost every good role(from DiCaprio to Brando to Bergman) and they inevitably turn down some iconic parts. You could be right about this maybe changing the trajectory of Brando’s career in the 1960’s– but from what I know about Brando- he was restless— he didn’t always think very highly of his profession and the ups and downs, peaks and valleys– seem inevitable. Maybe without his 1960’s being a little down- we don’t get his big comeback in the 1970’s? Who knows?
Mutiny on the Bounty. Other interpretations of Fletcher Christian pale in comparison. Just watched it again and marveled at Brando’s sensitive performance, which is often overlooked.
@Robert Porter Bunn— thanks for sharing and for visiting the site. Why do you think the consensus is Gable is superior? I’ve seen both but haven’t seen Brando’s version in a long time. I don’t remember which actor gave the better performance (I think there’s something to be said for Gable’s energy) but I do think the 1935 version is the stronger film.
Brando is an actor, with a capital “A”. I admire him greatly and his talent is undeniable. Though I think that it was actually Anna Magnani who essentially used presentational acting for the first time (not sure on this) he is definitely the first thespian to change the history of cinema by using it. But I can’t be the only one who believes that his performance in the Godfather is overrated! In the same way that Brando is an Actor, the Godfather is a Masterpiece and I think this elevates his already excellent work into something to behold. But I honestly feel like it pales in comparison to his other work – I believe he is excellent as always but not amazing – it feels like the sort of heavy make-up transformative performance that we’re so used to revere. I think many actors have achieved that, maybe to greater effect (say Cotillard in La Vie En Rose, even though the film is about 2,000 slots beneath the Godfather). I find that his poetic and deeply felt work in The Last Tango in Paris the very same year is superior to his Godfather, if one takes the overall quality of the movie aside. The same goes for Streetcar, but that’s just my opinion.
Godfather isn’t his best performance. On the Waterfront is. Maybe Apocalypse Now too.
Calling Brando’s performance overrated is wrong though. He is superb in all 3 of these movies. Look at the “look at how they massacred my boy” scene. That’s one of the best acted scenes of all time.
@Georg– certainly I respect your opinion but can’t agree with you on Brando’s work in The Godfather being overrated. If you think his work in Last Tango is superior that’s one thing. He’s brilliant in Last Tango– but I can’t overrated? Really? …. Absolutely not. I think it is one of the best performances of the 1970’s. Which would put it up there all-time.
@Drake- yeah I get that it has great admirers. I don’t dislike it, it’s a great performance in a masterpiece. I guess my main point is that I disagree with people hailing it as his best work – I believe he’s done better, not to take away from the greatness of the Godfather performance, but to simply say that I was not as fond of it as I were of the rest of his body of work.
@Georg– so would it be your 4th best Brando performance? I think I could live with that. haha. Any lower and I’d have problems.
@Drake- haha, actually I’m a strong supporter of his 3 of so minute appearance in Apocalypse Now, so I think it would be my 5th, but yeah it doesn’t get lower than that
According to you, Brando is the most talented but his resume is weaker than a few other actors.
For directors, who is similar to Brando. Who would you say is the most talented director with not such a strong resume?
@Azman– good question- I hadn’t really thought about this. I’d look to directors that died young (Murnau, Vigo, Fassbinder)– I mean they did have great resumes but probably not to their talents. Those that stopped working or didn’t work often (Leone basically made one film from 1971 on and it’s a big fat masterpiece), Tarkovsky both died a little young and didn’t work often) and those that had big masterpieces but never quite reached those heights again (Ridley Scott a little with Blade Runner), Andrew Dominik with Jesse James… what do you think?
I’m probably missing some obvious ones that were their own worst enemies or had production issues or something (i think Peckinpah was debilitated by alcoholism)
Great list Drake.
What about Cameroon. Brilliant in the 80s and 90s. He has not made a lot of great movies in the 21st century(his 20th century movies are better than avatar) and he works soooooo infrequently.
Malick has become worse too but I wouldn’t include him on such a list because the few movies he made from 1973-2011 are phenomenal. He would have been even better if continued making movies at the same level (especially since he has started working more frequently).
Wouldn’t someone like Orson Welles be Brando’s proper opposite number? Peerless genius level talent, and he turned in a legendary filmography, but probably not quite to the level of his talent.
This is a great example. Like Brando his filmography is excellent. I do think that he has acted in superb films and directed some great movies too (2nd for TSPDT).
You are referring to Welles as a director more than an actor right? As great as he was in the 3rd man and as Charles F Kane, he was a much superior director. As an actor, he is not comparable to Brando
Yes, I think Welles was quite a good actor, in addition to the two films you list he’s superb in Touch of Evil. However, I was referring to his talent and legacy as a director when I compared him to Brando’s acting bona fides.
Isn’t it crazy. Welles is 2nd(!) on TSPDT top 1000 and he has acted in some superb films and we still feel that his filmography is not at the level of his talent. That’s insane.
Would you agree that he might be one of (if not the) most important ‘all-round’ men in film history. Brilliant director but also a great actor with brilliant screen presence.
The only other ‘all-round’ cinematic genius on the level of Orson Welles is Charlie Chaplin. He acted so well in his movies(the ending of City Lights). He was great as a director (though, I believe he was a better performer). In addition to that, he even composed his own music (some of the best film scores in my opinion. A good score is very important to a silent movie. Chaplin’s musical scores perfectly enhance his movies).
Are there other people (similar to Welles and Chaplin) that you can think of? Eastwood maybe?
@Matt Harris– this is the answer- yes– thank you– own worst enemy at times even fits the Welles/Brando comparison and many people consider them both the best (and I wouldn’t have a big argument with that)
@Drake- It’s interesting you mention you’re theory on why Brando maybe fell off a bit in ’54 (due to Kazan), because I’ve always been curious as to why he fell of once more after his brief comeback in the early 70’s (and even retired at the end of the decade) and for why he became increasingly more difficult to work with (Apocalypse Now). I’ve kind of theorized that it was a similar situation to Kazan because (can’t remember where exactly) I had heard that after Brando saw Last Tango, he apparently felt a bit betrayed by Bertolucci for the very “naked” performance (figuratively) that he got out of Brando and that he vowed to never give such a raw performance like that again. Which isn’t all that difficult to believe due to Brando’s aversion to publicity and desire to hide much of his true personality (often playing mental games with interviewers). Not quite sure if it’s true but it’s interesting to consider.
@Thomas Locke- thanks for sharing. Interesting. I need to read a Brando biography. A genius.
That’s True. But i think that Brando just doesnt care of acting. He’s not De Niro (in the Last century haha) Simple as that.
I think his work in Missouri Breaks is very underrated.It’s one of the most unique characters ever put on film.
Do you think Marlon Brando should have won the academy award for best actor for Last Tango In Paris in 1973?
Why is The Score(2001) not in the archives?Has a cast for the ages.Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes.
I thought his film Mutiny on The Bounty(1962) had enough praiseworthy elements to land in the archives.You should write a page about Mutiny On The Bounty.A lot of things to write.
I like On The Waterfront but I just don’t get why the world credits that performance with introducing a new form of realism to Cinema?? Is is just me or was Brando superior in A Streetcar Named Desire.. I could’ve sworn he accomplished the realism & the method with Streetcar and not On The Waterfront.
@Jay– I think the two films (and performances from Brando) are a pair. But there’s a sensitivity and depth in Brando’s Terry Malloy that just isn’t there in Streetcar. That said- Brando is a revelation in Streetcar. You can’t go wrong with those two performances.
Thank you for your response. I watched both films back to back and I was extremely curious. Because I know as students of cinema & theater, we’re taught that On The Waterfront is the official start of the new era.. I just needed to hear from someone why that was though.
Both are excellent & of the greatest performance of all time (top 20). I just couldn’t wrap my head around it lol. I hope I didn’t come off as pretentious or sly with my question, cause it could read that way.
@Jay- Agree on both being excellent and among the best. Your comment was totally fine–not pretentious or sly or anything. I don’t know if I’d call Brando’s work in On the Waterfront as “the official start of the new era”. Brando and his style of acting is credited with being a big change– and I agree with that. But he has what? five archiveable films before that. And Montgomery Clift is doing a lot of the same things– Red River is six years before On the Waterfront and many talk about it as the old school method (Wayne) vs the new school method (Clift)- and they’re both marvelous. I’d say Brando in On the Waterfront is cited as the best of the start of the new era if that makes sense. Small distinction.
Also, maybe it’s a matter of my obsession with dates – Being that Streetcar came out in 1951 & Waterfront in 1954. Tricking myself into believe that Brando excellence couldn’t have possibly gotten any higher after Streetcar.
Also, you’re correct the level of introspection and sensitivity simply didn’t emerge within a total package with Streetcar – which was a mixture of stage theatricality & film acting. On The Waterfront, Brando could 100% immerse himself within the human dynamic. Thank you, for helping me clear my head lol.
Freshman was such a wonderful movie for 1 hour 34 minutes and 14 seconds.I am absolutely pissed at what happened after that.Why can’t The Godfather even force a worthless young punk to marry his daughter like he said he would do.Why can’t he organize a wedding for his.daughter?Why can’t he settle his this daughter with Broderick in Sicily and come to his real home with Sonny,Tom and Michael and organized Connie’s wedding like in the start of Godfather(1972).I know Godfather Part 2 footage is a problem and reference to The Godfather as well but other than this entire scenario could have happened to Vito Corleone before his death in The Godfather.
Marlon Brando is great here and probably deserved a Oscar nomination based on the 1st hour 34 minute and 14 second mark.But then the whole film Brando included made it an utter disgrace to The Godfather.This should go down as one of the worst 8 minute ending to a film in film history which was actually a really good film(Nothing remarkable but still).Since you are a cinema lover what’s your response to this and what do you think of the film and Brando’s performance overall?
Why the hell can’t they stop the film at 1 hour 34 minute and 14 second mark with Broderick saying “all the animals were sent to the Bronx Zoo” and ended it.
This is a great site and I recently found it and I just love the great work done here.Don’t be offended in anyway I just said my personal opinion that’s all.
@Anderson– love your name by the way- two of the best current auteurs! Thanks for the compliment on the site. I love your passion for The Freshman– I’ll have to see it again before I can speak on it. I’ve seen it 2-3 times- but it has been at least 10 years since the last time. I know exactly what you’re talking about when a film just doesn’t stick the landing at the very end. That’s frustrating. There are many examples- the very end of Spielberg’s Minority Report comes to mind with the happy ending. Frustrating
I mean there are some unnecessary scenes in Last Tango In Paris(mainly ones without Brando)but it didn’t affect the quality of the film a lot.There was just no need for this kind of an ending.Very stupid and unrealistic.Most importantly it makes some of the good things that happened earlier in the film absolutely worthless.I just felt bad for the big guy.He gave such a commited performance and the poor writing at the end just makes him look like a fool.That’s what dissapointed me the most.
Are you kidding me.He is absolutely brilliant in Julius Caesar. Of course he can contend with his peers having Julius Caesar as his 6th best performance. De Niro has crazy depth and resume so maybe he is the only one but I’m pretty sure in all the others in the top 10 male actors if they had Julius Caesar it would easily fall in their top 10. Brando is genius in that one but after that I have to admit it starts to get a little shaky.(performances 7-10)
Interestingly enough Brando won Best Actor twice for films that had 3 failed Best Supporting Actor nominations.
What are the most talented actors of all time ? Top 5 or 10 ?
Top 5 : Brando, Nicholson, DeNiro, Pacino, Day-Lewis ?
Top 10 : Who ? Maybe D. Hoffman, PS. Hoffman, Phoenix, Clift, Newman ?
@KidCharlemagne- great list, I probably overlook people like DDL and DeNiro as far as “talent” is concerned because they are remembered for being so studied and dedicated. Certainly it does not mean you couldn’t be both. Philip Seymour Hoffman is the one I always latch on to after Brando. Clift if a great one. Probably not deserving of the top 10 but how about Richard Burton for someone else– maybe we could look to someone with talent who was his own worst enemy when it comes to role choices or drinking/drugs that sort of hurt or even derailed their career.
What about Mickey Rourke ? I’m in love with 80s Rourke
@KidCharlemagne- Love that choice actually
@KidCharlemagne – I think Christian Bale is a possibility, he completely disappear into a role like few others. Patrick Bateman is an all time great character in my opinion. My top 10 is too high but I don’t think top 20 is unreasonable.
I think Gene Hackman deserves consideration, he is absolutely magnetic in a performance such as The French Connection and demonstrates crazy range when you compare Popeye Doyle to his character in The Conservation, Harry Caul. He can also play an evil, sadistic character extremely well as evident by his performance in Unforgiven as Sheriff Bill ‘Little Bill’ Daggett.
Hackman often played gregarious characters, he generally played extroverts and that is why I think his performance as Harry Caul, a clear introvert, is so important.
Like the Hackman suggestion. Bale is a good actor but when I think of him, it’s more about weight loss/gain than great acting. (He’s good but not great imho)
@KidCharlemagne – I guess we will have to agree to disagree on Bale not being a great actor, although I admit I may have gotten a little carried away suggesting top 20 and especially top 10.
There are obviously many factors that determine an actors success including dedication/work ethic, intelligence, people skills/understanding of human behaviors, and yes some degree of luck as there are obviously talented actors who never get that big break whereas there are some actors who maybe are less talented but they are in the right place at the right time.
I think there are different ways of defining “talented” but I assume you are referring to natural talent of which I think there a number of elements to it:
range – the ability to play many different types of characters. Think Gary Oldman or PSH
emotional range – ability to convincingly play various levels on the human emotional spectrum. Think of how different Sean Penn’s two oscar winning performances are; Jimmy from Mystic River (2003) and Harvey Milk in the film Milk (2008)
screen presence – the ability to dominate scenes whether its verbally or through body language, some actors like Nicholson, Denzel, Bogart, Newman, etc. have an almost magnetic pull. In some cases it’s even difficult to articulate why the audience is so drawn to their characters.
Adaptability – some actors can disappear into a role. Think Daniel Day Lewis, if you did not know otherwise would you ever be able to guess that Daniel Plainview from There Will Be Blood is the same actor who played Abraham Lincoln in the film Lincoln (2012)
physical talent – certain performances require varying levels of phsycial abilities, for instance actors who play boxers often will prepare for the role by actually training as if they are actual professional prize fighters training for a fight. Another example of physical acting comes in the form of action movies. Tom Cruise for instance, is an actor who I believe is known for performing his own stunts.
special abilities – unique or rare skills in a particular area that few others have. Robin Williams for example, had an uncanny ability in using a massive range of voices, hilarious clip below from one of my favorite movies when I was a kid
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wC2DqFJ7UE
@Drake-Can an argument be made that Marlon Brando in The Last Tango in Paris is the greatest single acting performance of all time? But the film has some problems. It has way too many redundant parts and I thought Jean-Pierre Léaud was shockingly terrible in it. It’s kinda similar to The Godfather in that even though Brando is recognized as the lead he isn’t in the movie that much and there are a lot of scenes without him mainly between Leaud and Schneider. Although unlike The Godfather the movie misses him in these scenes.
@Anderson – Brando may be the most talented actor of all-time – and Last Tango is right there at the top for him so it is worthy of the discussion. But ultimately it is his third or fourth best performance – so going from that to the greatest single acting performance of all-time by anyone feels like a leap.
@Drake-It’s debatable Last Tango is Brando’s 3rd best performance. I don’t think it’s a leap at all. This one should be right there near the top of the discussion for the greatest performance. It’s raw, real and the scene with his dead wife is one of the best acted scenes you will ever see. Don’t get me wrong. I think the film lets him down somewhat with all of the unnecessary parts. But it’s still a great film and doesn’t really deteriorate Brando’s remarkable performance. Another thing I want to say is if someone reads a script of this film without watching it, it would be hard to believe there is enough material for a performance like this. If you read the script of the film of many other great performances almost all of them has the material in advance.
@Anderson – For sure – Brando is an acting god and he is masterful in Last Tango – a true artist. But, it is debatably his fourth best the other way, too with Streetcar.
Drake, it’s hilarious how we are sitting here debating Brando’s performances, and his role as Kurtz in Apocalypse Now (which I think is the greatest per-minute acting performance EVER in arguably the greatest film ever) is not even in the discussion… and better yet.. barely in his top 5
If anything sums up Brando’s genius it might be that
@Matthew – very well said!
My fav performance of Brando is The Godfather. I think this is the best acting performance (and DeNiro in Raging Bull in 2).