Why movies shouldn’t be taken seriously, according to Marlon Brando: “Commercialised glop”
In the history of art, there are countless forking moments. Whether it be artists or movements or societal changes, there are points in the artistic journey when two roads to different destinations appear. For cinematic acting, one of those moments was Marlon Brando.
A controversial figure, famed as much for his off-set antics as he was his powerful on screen performances, Brando climbing to his position as perhaps the quintessential acting genius is one of the most important moments in cinema history.
Looking back at the actors of the 20th century, it is easy to see how Brando became a watermark by which all other actors were measured. There was a time before and after Brando and his influence on the art of acting, the immersion in the role, the confrontation with the screen and the alluring demand to be human in every facet of the word, is immeasurable.
Brando was never one to truly recognise his contribution to the art form, though. In fact, he barely recognised it as an art at all, once noting it was “an empty and useless profession. I do it for the money because there is no pleasure”. It fits with the rotund icon’s demeanour at the end of his career as he seemingly chucked all that he had worked for into a heap that he cared very little about.
But it wasn’t just acting that was deemed futile, it was art in general. “The fact is, there are no contemporary writers of importance,” he shared. “Not one. O’Neill and Tennessee Williams had moments, but I don’t regard them as great classical writers,” the acting great lamented. But he held real disdain for movies, and especially for those behind the lens: directors.
Perhaps because he spent so much of his time on set, especially during his later years, arguing and clashing with the filmmakers in charge of the movie he was starring in, or perhaps because he just didn’t value their contribution, but despite working with some of the greats, Brando really didn’t care for filmmakers. “Movies? Forget it. I’m convinced that the larger the gross, the worse the picture,” he proclaimed.
But, he did save both an ounce of respect and a sad realisation for two of the era’s greatest directors: “Bergman and Buñuel are visionaries, wonderful artists and craftsmen. How many people in the world have ever seen one of their films or ever heard of them? How can you take movies seriously?”
Brando had spent most of his life in pursuit of making movies, so it’s hard to take too much of this rant with any degree of seriousness, but what is clear is that screen acting did not quell Brando’s artistic desire. An actor who devoted himself to the minutia of his roles was left despondent by the movie business: “You go on the set with the script in your back pocket. You take it out and read: ‘Let’s see … in this one Brando plays an Indian who attacks the stagecoach.’ OK, let’s roll ’em. Commercialised glop, not worth thinking about.”
Marlon Brando is a fork in the road for many reasons. His acting style, which shaped countless performers, and his outrageous behaviour on set might have done exactly the same. But perhaps his most interesting facet is that he is one of the greatest actors in movie history to absolutely hate the movies.
