Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile The Matt Damon Column Previous Previous Next Next
Matt Damon News Column
Scorsese interview, photos
  • There's an interview with Martin Scorsese in the latest Entertainment Weekly, but the references to Matt are minimal, including this strange quote below. The article is available thanks to Sammie 323's Effluvia, and in three parts: one, two, and three.

    Scorsese: "Matt and Leo didn't know which character they wanted to play in this film. But I knew. Matt has this cocky attitude, a bravado. And Leo, his face is a battlefield of moral conflicts. The pain that comes across through his eyes...he's like Montgomery Cliff or Paul Newman."

  • Photos of Matt, Lucy and Isabella are from Ramey Pix.

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us Image Hosted by ImageShack.us Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
  • 25 comments or Leave a comment
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 02:19 am (UTC) (Link)
    Yeah, I just got my copy in the mail and I was more than a little stunned by the comment. It's almost as if Scorsese mixed the two guys up, as I would certainly think that the 'cocky' line applies more to Leo. And Matt having 'bravado?' If he does, he's never displayed it in interviews, so I really can't understand what Scorsese is talking about here. I think the old man mixed 'em up. Or EW did. It wouldn't be the first time EW blundered big time in their editing.

    As for the comparison to those stars of old, I think the guy is *way* off. I have nothing against DiCaprio, but in no way is he on the same level as Monty Clift or Paul Newman. They were ten times the actor he is. Matt is much closer to being at their level.

    mattdamoncolumn From: mattdamoncolumn Date: September 24th, 2006 02:27 am (UTC) (Link)
    It is a really strange comment to me. He calls Matt cocky and dismisses him, and then says Leo is brilliant and one of the greats of all time. Yep, we all know Marty thinks Leo is God, but he shouldn't, in a "compare and contrast" sentence, play favourites so blatantly.

    No director or co-star has ever called Matt cocky before.

    (Though I certainly can't dismiss many of the smart-ass comments in the Departed press junket transcript - I'm guessing Matt's nervous around Scorsese still.)
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 09:22 am (UTC) (Link)
    I just don't see Matt as cocky. At all. Type A personality with a determination to get the part *right* (be it a conjoined twin or a gay serial killer), yes. Matt can take on any role and bring it to life and that's what started my admiration for the man. That his interviews / actions show a kind man with an intelligence off the scales solidified it for me.

    I don't get the Leo worshipping. I *like* Leo but I find his acting lacking. Leo fans are going to assassinate me, but years ago when I saw "The Titanic" I thought it a tremendously well done film. I vividly recall discussing it with friends and my bottom line was that it would've been absolutely superb had someone else played Jack. Anyone else. My opinions haven't changed. "GWH" made me cry, it wrung emotions from me and I thought about it for ages afterwards. "The Titanic" had me exclaiming, "wow, those special effects rock."

    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 08:23 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Matt as Actor

    The amazing thing is that Scorcese has, in previous interviews, spoken of Matt's character coming from inside--he spoke to how he liked to watch Matt's character thinking: a real actor's skill. I think Scorcese WISHES Leo could measure up to the classic actors he mentions (clearly, he can't), but he's desperate for Leo to get an Oscar and wants one for himself (frankly, he deserves one). The only way he can hope to accomplish this is by promoting Leo at Matt's expense. We do foolish things sometimes when infatuated. Hope this isn't too brutal an assessment, Felicity. We know Matt is in great semand because of his skills, and we know what a fine actor he is. Is it possibe Scorcese last saw Matt in GWH and hasn't seen Rainmaker or Ripley or Bourne?

    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 04:16 am (UTC) (Link)
    ummmmmmmmm, cocky my a**. Thats kind of a ridiculous comment. Makes me lose a bit of a respect for a fairly talented director. Maybe he should learn to know his actors better. Matt seems much more dedicated and how is he as cocky if he doesnt need to date a model to prove his worth?
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 01:07 pm (UTC) (Link)

    i cant get thes potos

    can somebody help me i want to see matts baby every time theirs a photo it sends me to a sighn up sheet to wir image can some body make them biger or just give us free images
    mattdamoncolumn From: mattdamoncolumn Date: September 24th, 2006 10:07 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: i cant get thes potos

    Those photos are not available in a larger size. (And if you click they send you to the Imageshack homepage, not Wireimage.)
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 02:27 pm (UTC) (Link)


    Leo is a good actor but I think highly overrated in Scorcese's eyes.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 02:47 pm (UTC) (Link)
    Matt is anything but cocky! i got so mad when i read that in the magazine the other day. In my opinion he is the furthest actor from it. Since Leo is his favorite little buddy, i really do think that he picked leo for the more emotional role and larger role in the departed purposely so he gets all of the press and recognition. how rude!

    anyways i love that second picture of them! they look like the happiest family! how cute!

    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 08:10 pm (UTC) (Link)

    TV Alert

    For those of us in the UK there is a programme about The Departed on Saturday night. Quite late on ITV I think. After Parky. Though I don't have details to hand. But check your TV guides. Also, the back cover of the Sunday Times Culture section had a huge Departed poster. Confirming that it will open on 6 Oct in the UK also.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 25th, 2006 10:25 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: TV Alert

    Thankyou so much!

    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 08:21 pm (UTC) (Link)
    Maybe it was a mis-quote of some kind... Matt Damon cocky? That's like saying a fish is afraid of water.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 09:36 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Director's got a point

    I think there is truth in what he's saying. No doubt Matt is a fantastic actor who is in a caliber of his own. However, he would benefit more as that actor to be more sensitive and less methodical as has been transparent in his last few movie roles. He's gotten a little complacent.

    Director's have eyes for these sort of things and I get what this one's saying. If Matt were to get more in touch with his sensitive or spiritual side he'd evolve much faster as an actor and overall success. Just my humble opinion. There's always room to grow. (Also, it's not about dating a supermodel to prove anything. Matt lives in Maimi and New York of all places!) He's a great actor, with brilliant success. I'm sure he'll figure it out.
    mattdamoncolumn From: mattdamoncolumn Date: September 24th, 2006 10:28 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    Just one note: Matt has to either have a base in NY or LA for work, and he chooses NY because he likes the city and it's closer to Boston. He lives in Miami when possible because that's where his wife's family is and his step-daughter goes to school there. I don't consider either choice a sign of vanity or status, as you imply.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 25th, 2006 03:37 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    Nice to meet you F, but you missed my point on that one. I understand what you're saying but I was merely trying to bring up why anyone would compare and judge another actor or who he was dating as it was irrelevant to the main topic. I don't think it wise to compare him to other actors either. To compare him to Leo would be like trying to compare him to Depp. -You can't! Each is different with their own lasting potential. Also, I wasn't implying vanity or status, but since you brought it up..

    Regardless, my point was my view of how his acting has become. He's spitting out projects but I keep seeing the same thing. Thus, I still hold to my view- he's become more methodical (and it is transparent) or perhaps has reached a plateau of sorts. All I do know is what I see- his greater potential but him not tapping into it. It's easy when someone reaches a certain level of success or their acting to go through the motions or know how to apply what they know. The challenge is to get outside or beyond that. If he accomplishes that, he would be a dangerous contender to other actors. He has the potential to be that extra great, but I'm just not seeing it now. Some things can't be learned or "practiced" and have to be pulled from the inside out. Thus, uninhibited or even if unbeknownst to him. This makes me wonder if the people on his payroll are really telling him the truth or pushing him that extra way as to challenge himself in the right ways, or if he's just "Matt Damon" to them, so they tell him what he wants to hear or that he is already a great, accomplished actor. (which he is, but...)

    And since it appears I have started a debate, I'll explain myself a little more. I reference him needing to be more sensitive or in tuned to his spiritual side because it would bring to his acting the missing elements or the greater catalysts which would unleash his true potential. Or at least how he should or could evolve as an actor. -It's range of depth and it is the answer, but if you don't want to believe me that's fine. He'll still be the great actor that he is now. But we did see an authentic glimpse of this in GWH and a few others. And the person stating about emotional and Jim Carrey mention is also misunderstanding the depths of the sensitivity some of us are referencing here. Jim Carrey is emotional portrayed on the outer service, there is a difference. So tapping into those inner depths, well, just like with any job, when you evolve as a person/being, you bring those skills with you into your work. It is more natural. I think we're yet to see the best of Matt Damon the actor. -Peace
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 25th, 2006 03:45 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    sorry bout that- *surface*

    If you can correct that before you post it, fine. If not I'm sure people will get what I meant. Thanx
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 25th, 2006 12:28 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    I agree with you. I think there is truth in what Scorcese is saying. After all, Scorcese KNOWS Matt and none of us do. I would like to see Matt acting with a little more sensitivity sometimes. He hasn't been in a role that I have thought he was really good in a while. He is capable.

    Also, I know Matt is our favorite actor. But Leonardo DiCaprio is an excellent actor. He was really GREAT in The Aviator and deserved to get the Oscar over Jamie Foxx.
    mattdamoncolumn From: mattdamoncolumn Date: September 25th, 2006 02:05 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    Any opinion on an actor or project is highly subjective - I thought Leo was completely miscast in GONY and The Aviator and brought down both movies. I couldn't take him or the movies seriously.

    I think Syriana was a great movie with a great script, and the best available project at the time. There were director (and studio) issues, but Matt played his role as far as he could, within the limited time.

    By sensitivity do you mean emotion, and the need to better display emotional states? I'm unsure of your meaning.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 25th, 2006 09:23 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    I agree with you on Leo in *The Aviator*. I liked the movie (GONY I couldn't sit through so can't offer an opinion). To be honest about Leo I find his performances wooden and the character of *Jack* from the Titanic seems to appear in every film. It's all the same to me.

    I think Matt plays every role to the maximum from what he has to work with. He can only go as far as the script and the director. I can't imagine *more sensitivity*. I started admiring him, wanting to watch any film he was in because you KNOW that you're going to get a solid portrayal, an honest interpretation which brings the characters to life and makes you believe. It's hard to believe that it's the same man portraying Rudy in "The Rainmaker" who becomes Jason Bourne in the "Bourne" films, the sweet nervous man/boy in "SOY", the high profile analyst in "Syriana" and my favourite, "TTMR" where he managed to create a feeling of empathy for a serial killer.

    You want in your face emotion? Try Jim Carrey.

    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 25th, 2006 01:33 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    I think Matt's more in tune with his feelings and emotions than other celebrities. You ever hear him talk about how much he loves Ben Affleck?--the guy holds nothing back. And that's just one example of his fearlessness when it comes to exposing his heart.

    One thing that particularly bothers me about Scorsese's comment is that in it, he praises Leo's acting ability, but only talks about how he sees Matt's natural personality, and, quite frankly, talks about him in a very insulting way. Furthermore, he says he gathered this about him *before* the roles were assigned, which means all of those arguments about how 'Scorsese worked with Matt so he'd know' don't really apply.

    If I were Matt and my director chose to speak about me in such a way and praise my co-star at the same time, I would be very hurt and very insulted. A good director does not talk about his actors that way, at least not to the media. It's common courtesy and common sense.

    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 26th, 2006 02:21 am (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    I think most people on this board are taking Scorcese's comments all wrong. I don't think he in any way is trying to insult anyone. He would not do that with the film getting ready to open. I think he is talking about the roles that Matt has done. You have to admit that many of Matt's roles are characters with a cockiness to them. School Ties, Good Will Hunting, Saving Private Ryan,Rounders, The Third Wheel, The Bourne Movies, The Brothers Grimm,and Syriana all are examples of roles that could be described as cocky. And he did a great job with them!

    I have seen the Hong Kong movie Infernal Affairs on which The Departed is based and I don't think you can say that one role is "better" than the other. The characters, of course, are different, but they are both very good roles that each actor can do a lot with. I think Scorcese chose which actor he thought would be better in each role.

    There is no need to be so overly sensitive about comments about Matt. Leo can be a great actor and Matt can be a great actor. There is room for both of them even in the same movie.

    I want to see Matt lose himself in a role and I have not seen that lately. He seems to be holding back since The Legend of Bagger Vance and All the Pretty Horses were critical and box office failures. He seemed to take that very personally even though I thought his acting was great in both. Some of his best work.

    I am hoping that this is the year I see him raise his acting to a new level.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 26th, 2006 03:53 pm (UTC) (Link)

    Re: Director's got a point

    I think you've got a good perception also Stephanie.

    I don't believe this director intentionally set out to hurt anyone. I think he was calling it how 'he' sees it. Thus, Matt in his personal nature simply looks more like (though how ever normal or down to earth he may be) that jock-type (thus, cocky) way. And if you look at his past roles, they're perceived like the same person. So, I, too, don't think he was intentionally knocking Matt. "It's common courtesy and common sense." -This is true and some people don't think before they speak!(Pope's late comments a case in point!) You'd think people in these positions or in the public eye or who are influential would use a little more caution or common sense, but it's what makes the world go round! Further, a good director would use their skills to get out of that actor what they needed.

    Re: Matt's real persona: "And that's just one example of his fearlessness when it comes to exposing his heart." - Really??? *still thinking on that one*

    Look, comments can be a funny thing. And sure, as a human being these things can sting, but you just don't know- one day later hose remarks may make Matt grateful for having motivated him to evolve his art. Sometimes being pissed off = motivation or self discovery. I wouldn't worry too much about him; he obviously didn't get this far with thin skin.

    I didn't start this thread to cause a debate. Some of the topics here are apples and oranges. I was feeding off another's comment and added my own perception since it appeared it was going in that direction. Obviously, I'm not alone in my opinion either. To me, as an artist, he's stuck. That is not to say he is not one of the greats, because obviously he is. But in case my main points were missed, that explanation or own perception is above. Also, on another note, I've often wondered why his appearance is never changed in movies like some other actor's (minus the unhealthy weight loss stint)?

    To the poster below, I don't think anyone is being overly sensitive. I think you are seeing people *honestly* telling you what they are seeing in someone who they see has greater potential. -That's all. I also agree with you on 'Horses', I forgot to reference that one. Felt he captured that role quite nicely. And I have to say I agree at Bagger Vance also. That was a beginning for him. The original Bourne was superb also, and I'm not just saying that.

    Still in agreement that he's yet to prove his real self but perhaps one day we'll see that. I've said all I need to on the topic.
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 24th, 2006 10:08 pm (UTC) (Link)
    Beautiful family pics though! :)
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 25th, 2006 08:26 am (UTC) (Link)

    Scorses's Interview

    I just wanted to add my opinion to this debate. I think that Scorsese has worked with both actors and knows them better than we do. Having said that I think Matt's cockiness and bravado as Scorsese describes it might be a mask to hide his shyness.

    Matt is a better actor than Leo, that's obvious. I agree with your comments about the Aviator, Leo's acting lacked depth and was rather shallow and showy I thought, and the poor casting of some of the other actors spoiled the movie for me. He's certainly no Paul Newman or Montgomery Clift. Scorsese really has a blind spot where Leo is concerned, he's not nearly as good an actor as he thinks he is.

    Perhaps Matt is too self-effacing for his own good. The marketers of these movies have picked his co-stars to push the movies, perhaps they feel that Matt isn't willing to do what's required to sell himself. I personally think that is a good thing, I think Angelina Jolie is overexposed at the moment, and I wouldn't go to see a movie just because she was in it. I don't rate her as an actress, she just looks wooden and vacant on camera to me, but I'm obviously in a minority. Anyway like I said just my opinion. Love the photos of him with his family by the way. MP
    From: (Anonymous) Date: September 25th, 2006 11:03 am (UTC) (Link)
    Just to say the family pics are cool. Thanks!
    (Sometimes i like when he wears his
    glasses -for some reason!)

    and the Scorsese comment..most people have said what i think. So i'm going to leave that!
    But i will just say Leo is a good actor - but VERY overated IMO! (like said Matt is better - obviously)
    ''I don't get the Leo worshipping'' I don't get it either ~Maureen~

    25 comments or Leave a comment