michael caine vs robert deniro

My husband got so tired watching me make jam last night that we stayed home instead of going to the movies. No, I'm just kidding (about the jam I mean). Was the bundt cake that bad that he could not get off the couch? Maybe he was afraid that I intended to go out in public in my jam shirt and barrettes? hmmmm...

Anyway, we stayed home and watched The Mission. I like Robert De Niro a lot, but I liked Jeremy Irons even better in this movie. I liked the movie a whole lot. But this post is not about Jeremy Irons. I'll do that another day. This is about Robert De Niro, and Michael Caine, who is not in the The Mission.

When I looked up the list of movies in which Robert De Niro has acted, I was impressed. He's made more than one major feature per year for a lot of years. I have always thought of Michael Caine as
THE MOST PROLIFIC ACTOR IN THE WORLD but De Niro gives him a run for his money. Here's how they stack up:

Age: RDN is 61 - born August 17 1943
MC is 72 - born March 14 1933

Number of Movies Acted-In: RDN 71
MC 117

First Movie (as listed on the 100% reliable internet...phhehhh!)
RDN 1965 Trois Chambres a Manhattan He was 22 years old
MC 1956 Sailor Beware He was 23 years old
I think these are the release dates, so they were probably a year or two younger when they made them, but they also cranked out movies faster those days I think - no three years in post production while we figure out what to do with this turkey, just sell the show (ahem. sorry)

Avg. # of Movies/Year during career:
RDN 1.8 movies per year (including 2 currently in production)
MC 2.4 movies per year (including one completed but not yet released)

So Michael Caine is more prolific. But they're both good and make mostly good movies. But that's not what this post is about.

Could Robert De Niro Catch up? What if Michael Caine continued to make movies at the same rate indefinitely, and Robert De Niro decided he wanted to match Michael Caine's movie per year rate in say, 5 years. How many movies would Robert De Niro need to make by 2010 if Michael Caine kept going at his established rate, for them to have equal rates by that time.

I won't answer that. I'm just a movie geek, not a math geek.

Dad, let me know. And tell me how fast it took you to figure it out. Your rate of solution is also of interest.

And mom, I put in a couple of dangling participles for you, because a good mom is a mom you can joke with.

So in conclusion, but unrelated to much I have said so far, I think we should delete We're No Angels from Robert De Niro's list because it was such a terrible movie. But we should give double credit for Cape Fear. I loved that one. So it does not affect his rate at all.

Oh yeah, and we should give bonus points for This Boy's Life. A good movie, with Robert De Niro, actually made locally. Which is really a good balance-out for We're No Angels - local stinker.

question: who cares?

mompoet - I know, Shut your pie hole