Some films manage to attract top-tier actors, leaving many to wonder how they achieved this. Perhaps Al Pacino’s explanation can provide some clarity.
Pacino, celebrated for iconic roles in movies like Scarface and The Godfather, once took part in a film that earned him a Razzie award, a recognition for the worst in cinema akin to the Oscars but for underwhelming productions.
There was a particular character Pacino portrayed that both the audience and critics unanimously deemed poor.
He disclosed to the New York Times why he agreed to participate in an Adam Sandler project, contrasting with his usual serious film roles.
The actor cited a personal circumstance as the reason behind accepting the role.
His involvement in Sandler’s comedic failure has long baffled viewers of the film.
Fortunately, Pacino’s explanation in the interview offers clarity to those who read it.
Not everyone was understanding, especially some Reddit users.
One commented, “I bet he has a couple mill in his sock…”
Another remarked, “Boggles my mind how people like this run out of money.”
The film in question was the notorious 2011 Jack and Jill, where Pacino played an exaggerated version of himself, characterized by extravagance and unpredictability.
The plot centered around one of Sandler’s characters attempting to recruit Pacino for a Dunkin’ Donuts advertisement, leading to chaos.
This performance earned him the Razzies for Worst Supporting Actor and Worst Screen Couple.
While his participation in the film puzzled many, Pacino had a straightforward reason: financial necessity.
He explained, “My accountant was in prison, and I needed something quickly.”
His accountant had been convicted of embezzling funds from clients to support an opulent lifestyle, and although Pacino didn’t confirm being defrauded, he realized he needed immediate funds.
Kenneth Starr, the accountant, was sentenced to over seven years in prison in 2010 for misappropriating $33 million.
The 84-year-old actor remarked, “There came a point in my life when I needed a role because I realised I had no more money. I needed something fast. So I took this role.”
This decision allowed him to maintain his lifestyle and cover his expenses, a move many fans understood.
One fan commented, “Even if he did a bad job they still had to give him that 2 mill.”
Another added, “He didn’t even do a bad job, he was the best part of a terrible movie.”
Others supported his choice, stating, “It’s not unethical to take a role in a sh*tty movie, it’s just a job, so good on him for securing the bag,” and, “The bills don’t care if the movie was a flop or not because they’re gonna keep coming regardless. Work is work.”