|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Aug 22, 2022 0:21:46 GMT
Here's the deal........... I'm sick and tired of talking about Lynch, PTA, Nolan, DiCaprio, Phoenix or DDL on every single thread... yawn.
Let's talk about the enigmatic figure that is Bogart. He's a strange figure in movies history. One of the most well known actors before DePac. He is in a multiple of classics, plus he worked with some of the most famous directors like Huston, Ray, Hawks. He obviously started as the typical Hollywood movie star with the lisp and gangster accent, but later I think he became one the greats of acting. 1948 in my opinion is his turning point. 5 or 6 out of 7 of my favorite performances from him came from 1948 on. Key Largo, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, The Caine Mutiny, The African Queen, and In a Lonely Place.
Plus stuff like Sabrina, Beat the Devil, The Desperate Hours, and The Harder They Fall..... some of his next tier performances, they all indicate his improvement as an actor. He does everything more effortlessly and easily as a veteran actor in the 50s. He's like the male Michelle Pfeiffer. Started improving at a point (her 1989), and shedding his movie star image. Even tho some people (not on Mar) still wants to see him thru the lens of before 1948.
Plus, whenever anyone talks about private detectives, he's the glue figure. The first name that comes to mind in association with the two words private detective. Random person makes this comment: "So I have a friend who's a private detective." I ask.... "Ok, so like Humphrey Bogart????"
|
|
SZilla
Badass
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 1,005
Member is Online
|
Post by SZilla on Aug 22, 2022 1:09:25 GMT
Bogart, to me, has the greatest filmography out of any actor ever. While he isn't a chameleon type of actor, he is the type that elevates any project he's in simply by being in it and whose presence in a movie tends to mean that I'll enjoy it.
It's also a testament to his career and filmography that he was only 57 when he died but no one really thinks of him dying "young." It'd be as if Paul Newman had died in 1982 after the Verdict. We missed out on a lot more great performances from Bogie. Imagine Bogart appearing in the films of Don Siegel or something like The Taking of Pelham One Two Three.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 22, 2022 1:46:16 GMT
My favorite actor Pre-Brando .........I always say he was the actor of the 40s imo and then arguably had a better 50s before he died than his 40s maybe. Like his gangster peers EGR and Cagney he thought through roles - a lot - much more than people think - in ways much different than their more acclaimed rivals (Tracy, March, Muni) - who thought through roles too but not in the same ways exactly particularly character history arcs ........Bogart, Cagney and EGR are precursors to Garfield and the Method in that way (I once talked about Cagney in The Public Enemy "inventing" the Method on film in a scene where he takes his jacket off ffs) - even though they pre-date it ......there's very little "false" in Bogart - especially when he isn't held in check by the role .......... In A Lonely Place - his best - is insanely modern and if you like that work you'll find echoes of it in many other roles too. Bogart knew very well how to communicate to an audience in visual terms ........and how to please audiences without pandering or chasing them. He invented this idea of later roles "evoking" his earlier roles or winking to his famous roles in general ( Beat The Devil etc) - so his - ".....and I'll be waiting for you" line as Sam Spade - with clear sociopathic tendencies that pop up in his mental state in Treasure or Caine Mutiny among many others without it being redundant.... Petrified Forest and Desperate Hours had to both be played by him etc........that sort of "connectedness" in roles sets him apart and so does the psychological make-up of Bogart's characters too: I mean he literally calls Bergman a whore without using that word in Casablanca, while at the same time stopping a young woman from whoring herself for a visa.........like does anybody ever watch Casablanca and think what a fncked up guy Rick must be with the levels of sin all around him daily? .........without a wife? without a family? that far from home? Bogart plays all that stuff perfectly and it's because as early as early as '36 and The Petried Forest - he always gives the impression he carries this huge unseen weight on his shoulders in things he saw, had done or regrets or knows, there's a tremendous sadness to almost every Bogart character - in a way not seen in American actors and their characters until much later which again keeps him modern........the actor himself is like a movie character because Bogart on some level knew he was his own greatest asset......very few actors ever understood how to use their talent better than him.....he could not have gotten anymore out of his talent, given the era he worked in, and his short life span...... Love him......  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2022 1:53:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Aug 22, 2022 5:53:04 GMT
I feel like he was type cast a ton, but he was very good.
His relationship with Lauren Bacall will never not creep me out though. Ew.
|
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Aug 22, 2022 6:40:40 GMT
I feel like he was type cast a ton, but he was very good. His relationship with Lauren Bacall will never not creep me out though. Ew. Oh honey, why? Betty loved Bogie and has said so countless times in interviews and print. Or are you creeped out that Bogie married a gorgeous 21 year old Harper Bazaar & Vogue model? Obviously it was a good marriage to have lasted 12 years until his death...  |
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Aug 22, 2022 7:02:06 GMT
I feel like he was type cast a ton, but he was very good. His relationship with Lauren Bacall will never not creep me out though. Ew. Oh honey, why? Betty loved Bogie and has said so countless times in interviews and print. Or are you creeped out that Bogie married a gorgeous 21 year old Harper Bazaar & Vogue model? Obviously it was a good marriage to have lasted 12 years until his death... She was 19 and he was 44 and marriedwhen they met. Not saying it was illegal but the circumstances were beyond problematic and inappropriate. |
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Aug 22, 2022 10:26:18 GMT
SZilla - What character can you see Bogart playing in The Taking of Pelham One Two Three at 75 years old? Shaw's? @tyler - Yeah... duh. stabcaesar - Women just prefer mature men. Maybe less the only way around, but for girls with class (like Bacall), you can bet maturity is a much stronger and more attractive quality for her.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 22, 2022 14:29:58 GMT
One of the most electrifying and unique performers in classic Hollywood, and still holds true to this day. Bogart had a swagger and a charm that should never have worked, but no one's ever really been able to duplicate it. He's an actor that I think could've really made it in just about any era, and I could see a universe where he does well with the '70s new wave or even today. It's a shame he died right before the '60s and '70s, when I think he could've done some real great work in his winter years.
|
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Aug 22, 2022 15:11:52 GMT
stabcaesar - Women just prefer mature men. Maybe less the only way around, but for girls with class (like Bacall), you can bet maturity is a much stronger and more attractive quality for her. If this Bacall had been 10 years older it wouldn't have been creepy. The problem is Bacall was barely an adult, not the age gap per se. Bogart was also a huge star at the time while Bacall was a newcomer. It's beyond creepy. And "girls with class" wouldn't sleep with a much older, married man. |
|
SZilla
Badass
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 1,005
Member is Online
|
Post by SZilla on Aug 22, 2022 16:13:14 GMT
urbanpatrician I was more so thinking of Bogie in Matthau's role in a Eastwood in Blood Work sort of way, but it's admittedly been a while since i've seen the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 22, 2022 16:27:14 GMT
One of the most electrifying and unique performers in classic Hollywood, and still holds true to this day. Bogart had a swagger and a charm that should never have worked, but no one's ever really been able to duplicate it. He's an actor that I think could've really made it in just about any era, and I could see a universe where he does well with the '70s new wave or even today. It's a shame he died right before the '60s and '70s, when I think he could've done some real great work in his winter years. I kinda disagree that Bogart could make it in any era (to the extent he did). His acting style is too heightened to fit in with the 70's New wave Hollywood naturalism/realism. And by the time the 80's/90's/2000's made conventional good looks a major requirement for stardom again, the best Bogart could probably hope for is character actor status. I think he could only have become the gigantic leading man/movie star in the era he did 1930s-1950's, where unconventional looks like his were not a hindrance to stardom (especially if you fit into the right niche, like Gangster films. Same goes for James Cagney to a lesser extent) and his acting style still worked for the era it was in. I don't think you could transplant Bogart, looking and acting as he did into movies today and he'd make the same impression on modern audiences. They'd expect the lead of Casablanca to look like Austin Butler, not Bogie. Maybe Kirk Douglas or Marlon Brando might make a similar impression to modern audiences as they did at their peak, but not Bogart, imho. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 22, 2022 16:44:06 GMT
One of the most electrifying and unique performers in classic Hollywood, and still holds true to this day. Bogart had a swagger and a charm that should never have worked, but no one's ever really been able to duplicate it. He's an actor that I think could've really made it in just about any era, and I could see a universe where he does well with the '70s new wave or even today. It's a shame he died right before the '60s and '70s, when I think he could've done some real great work in his winter years. I kinda disagree that Bogart could make it in any era (to the extent he did). His acting style is too heightened to fit in with the 70's New wave Hollywood naturalism/realism. And by the time the 80's/90's/2000's made conventional good looks a major requirement for stardom again, the best Bogart could probably hope for is character actor status. I think he could only have become the gigantic leading man/movie star in the era he did 1930s-1950's, where unconventional looks like his were not a hindrance to stardom (especially if you fit into the right niche, like Gangster films. Same goes for James Cagney to a lesser extent) and his acting style still worked for the era it was in. I don't think you could transplant Bogart, looking and acting as he did into movies today and he'd make the same impression on modern audiences. They'd expect the lead of Casablanca to look like Austin Butler, not Bogie. Maybe Kirk Douglas or Marlon Brando might make a similar impression to modern audiences as they did at their peak, but not Bogart, imho. I think he could've easily made it in ways that Nicolas Cage and Christopher Walken made it (although maybe Bogie wouldn't have felt the need to do so many cash-grabs), and I could absolutely see a scenario where early Bogart charts a De Niro-esque route through the 1970s if paired with Scorsese. I don't think he would've been that bad a choice for Travis Bickle, for instance. Obviously he landed at the perfect time to play roles that were tailored to his iconic presence, but I think Bogart was deceptively versatile within his mode and I think he could've played in any sandbox if he truly wanted. |
|
Javi
Badass
Posts: 1,538 
Likes: 1,628
|
Post by Javi on Aug 22, 2022 17:06:11 GMT
Adore him - an original on the level of Brando, in the sense that they influenced everybody, but nobody seems to have influenced them. There's little connection between what Cagney and Robinson were doing in the 30s and what Bogart does in The Maltese Falcon - he can be said to be the first "existential" antihero of the screen - 12 years before Yves Montand in The Wages of Fear and 1 year before Camus wrote The Stranger (whose main character I can't help picturing as Bogart). He's a new figure of disillusionment and isolation in that film - already a postwar hero while the war was still going on - moreso than Jean Gabin in the fabulous Pepe le Moko who was still very much a romantic figure - Bogie is too on edge and too complicated to be simply a romantic figure - he can be heinously ugly, brutish, even vulgar. It's one of those beautiful ironies of life that he ended up being the male lead in maybe the best Hollywood romance ever made? It only makes him more fascinating - and so does Treasure of the Sierra Madre and the Lauren Bacall movies and his brilliant 50s run. And as brilliant as the 70s class of actors is, none of them can touch the mythology of Bogart - there's only Bogie and Brando up there.
|
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Aug 22, 2022 17:13:20 GMT
I' m not a fan. In fact I have not seen enough to make an statement. Probably because when I was born Boogie died many years ago and his movies were already old fashion.-
But what I can say, is that there are actors and theere are movie stars.
And he was a huge movie star that also can act.-
But don't get me wrong (at least from the movies that I remember) he was a movie star, not an actor.-
He was a self made man of his time, who (in case his life would be much longer) could not survive his career the early 1960s.-
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 22, 2022 19:30:27 GMT
I kinda disagree that Bogart could make it in any era (to the extent he did). His acting style is too heightened to fit in with the 70's New wave Hollywood naturalism/realism. And by the time the 80's/90's/2000's made conventional good looks a major requirement for stardom again, the best Bogart could probably hope for is character actor status. I think he could only have become the gigantic leading man/movie star in the era he did 1930s-1950's, where unconventional looks like his were not a hindrance to stardom (especially if you fit into the right niche, like Gangster films. Same goes for James Cagney to a lesser extent) and his acting style still worked for the era it was in. I don't think you could transplant Bogart, looking and acting as he did into movies today and he'd make the same impression on modern audiences. They'd expect the lead of Casablanca to look like Austin Butler, not Bogie. Maybe Kirk Douglas or Marlon Brando might make a similar impression to modern audiences as they did at their peak, but not Bogart, imho. I think he could've easily made it in ways that Nicolas Cage and Christopher Walken made it (although maybe Bogie wouldn't have felt the need to do so many cash-grabs), and I could absolutely see a scenario where early Bogart charts a De Niro-esque route through the 1970s if paired with Scorsese. I don't think he would've been that bad a choice for Travis Bickle, for instance. Obviously he landed at the perfect time to play roles that were tailored to his iconic presence, but I think Bogart was deceptively versatile within his mode and I think he could've played in any sandbox if he truly wanted. Agree to disagree. As I said, Bogart would be too theatrical for most of the 70's roles. His style is heightened. It works for his era because these are big Hollywood productions where we know it's supposed to be a movie, but he is not a 70's era actor stylistically. Simply as a performer, I think Bogart would play too "big" and broad for something like Taxi Driver. Acting evolved and Bogart's style was very much of it's time. |
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Aug 22, 2022 22:07:59 GMT
I agree with Stephen. Bogart would be good in any decade. I think he'd dominate the 60s which in all honesty plays right to his strengths. Guys like Marvin, Newman, McQueen and Holden did some of their best work that decade largely due to the void left upon from bogart's early death.
As for the 70s? Not sure because he'd be 70 years old firstly, and that's the point when lots of the classic Hollywood guys started declining except for O Toole, Heston, brando and a few other select names. But I think bogart would absolutely have an awesome 60s possibly better than his 50s which was great enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 23, 2022 3:41:06 GMT
I agree with Stephen. Bogart would be good in any decade. I think he'd dominate the 60s which in all honesty plays right to his strengths. Guys like Marvin, Newman, McQueen and Holden did some of their best work that decade largely due to the void left upon from bogart's early death. As for the 70s? Not sure because he'd be 70 years old firstly, and that's the point when lots of the classic Hollywood guys started declining except for O Toole, Heston, brando and a few other select names. But I think bogart would absolutely have an awesome 60s possibly better than his 50s which was great enough. I'm talking about if you transported Bogart in his prime/peak years to any decade, would his acting style/image/look still work....? I personally don't think it would in many decades. Bogart from Casablanca or The Maltese Falcon or The Petrified Forest would come off as a bizarre caricature in the 1970's because of how American screen acting evolved. Even Bogart's staccato vocal delivery is very much of his time. People no longer talked like him a few decades on. I like Bogart & a lot of his movies are great, but his acting style works as a time capusule of a certain era. There was a definite change in post-war American screen acting in the mid to late 1940's and Bogart represented the styles before that change. If we are talking noir actors who might work in most decades if you transported them at their peak/prime, Robert Mitchum is probably a better example. Mitchum's laconic style never really dates. |
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Aug 23, 2022 4:14:28 GMT
I agree with Stephen. Bogart would be good in any decade. I think he'd dominate the 60s which in all honesty plays right to his strengths. Guys like Marvin, Newman, McQueen and Holden did some of their best work that decade largely due to the void left upon from bogart's early death. As for the 70s? Not sure because he'd be 70 years old firstly, and that's the point when lots of the classic Hollywood guys started declining except for O Toole, Heston, brando and a few other select names. But I think bogart would absolutely have an awesome 60s possibly better than his 50s which was great enough. I'm talking about if you transported Bogart in his prime/peak years to any decade, would his acting style/image/look still work....? I personally don't think it would in many decades. Bogart from Casablanca or The Maltese Falcon or The Petrified Forest would come off as a bizarre caricature in the 1970's because of how American screen acting evolved. Even Bogart's staccato vocal delivery is very much of his time. People no longer talked like him a few decades on. I like Bogart & a lot of his movies are great, but his acting style works as a time capusule of a certain era. There was a definite change in post-war American screen acting in the mid to late 1940's and Bogart represented the styles before that change. If we are talking noir actors who might work in most decades if you transported them at their peak/prime, Robert Mitchum is probably a better example. Mitchum's laconic style never really dates. Hes going to evolve according to his time as well. Hes not gonna play Casablanca the same way if that movie was done in the 60s. It's just conventions of a decade that every actor is privy to or even obligated to. I just think the type of roles that bogart typically does got even better in the 60s given the surplus of 60s action and adventure movies, playing right into bogies wheelhouse. Someone like Stewart I see being more a product of his time because once those classic capra good man roles went away, Stewart resorted to westerns which for the most part he is unremarkable in. Everyone defines his legacy by Capra or Hitchcock and not his westerns which its clear that hes not John Wayne. Or even grant or mitchum because those guys usually play the same character without much variation and imo didnt change much by the decade. I dont think you can say that about bogart brando or lemmon because those are guys that evolved by the decade which leads me to believe that if bogart was transported two decades later he would play The Maltese Falcon or Casablanca differently. Would he be Deniro? Doubtful, but I think he'd be able to carve quite a career for himself in later decades as well....not just the 30s or 40s. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 23, 2022 4:42:20 GMT
I'm talking about if you transported Bogart in his prime/peak years to any decade, would his acting style/image/look still work....? I personally don't think it would in many decades. Bogart from Casablanca or The Maltese Falcon or The Petrified Forest would come off as a bizarre caricature in the 1970's because of how American screen acting evolved. Even Bogart's staccato vocal delivery is very much of his time. People no longer talked like him a few decades on. I like Bogart & a lot of his movies are great, but his acting style works as a time capusule of a certain era. There was a definite change in post-war American screen acting in the mid to late 1940's and Bogart represented the styles before that change. If we are talking noir actors who might work in most decades if you transported them at their peak/prime, Robert Mitchum is probably a better example. Mitchum's laconic style never really dates. Hes going to evolve according to his time as well. Hes not gonna play Casablanca the same way if that movie was done in the 60s. It's just conventions of a decade that every actor is privy to or even obligated to. I just think the type of roles that bogart typically does got even better in the 60s given the surplus of 60s action and adventure movies, playing right into bogies wheelhouse. Someone like Stewart I see being more a product of his time because once those classic capra good man roles went away, Stewart resorted to westerns which for the most part he is unremarkable in. Everyone defines his legacy by Capra or Hitchcock and not his westerns which its clear that hes not John Wayne. Or even grant or mitchum because those guys usually play the same character without much variation and imo didnt change much by the decade. I dont think you can say that about bogart brando or lemmon because those are guys that evolved by the decade which leads me to believe that if bogart was transported two decades later he would play The Maltese Falcon or Casablanca differently. Would he be Deniro? Doubtful, but I think he'd be able to carve quite a career for himself in later decades as well....not just the 30s or 40s. In regards to variation of character between Mitchum and Bogart, I'd disagree that Mitchum lacked variety. His Reverend Harry Powell from Night Of The Hunter and Max Cady from Cape Fear are two of the most distinct villains in cinema history and both are played completely differently. Mitchum could and did use accents when neccesary, such as when he played an Irishman in Ryan's Daughter. I actually think Mitchum had more range and ability to vary character than Bogart. He didn’t do the Cary Grant thing. Yes, Mitchum played a lot of similar characters and had a fallback persona, but that applies to just about every movie star, even modern ones with lots of range. Neither Mitchum nor Bogart showed facility for Shakespeare, but if I had to put money on one of them pulling off a major Shakespeare role to a high level, I'd put my money on Mitchum. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 26, 2023 0:10:30 GMT
Just finished watching Knock on Any Door (1949) - not one of his best, but uncommonly "Progressive" in the way it looks at crime - stands up to repeated watches and Bogart stretching a bit too ........ also what a great line:
“If I was as cynical as you I would hang myself.
Well, I’d be too cynical to trust the rope.” |
|
SZilla
Badass
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 1,005
Member is Online
|
Post by SZilla on May 26, 2023 2:46:28 GMT
Watched him in Black Legion about two weeks ago. Released a year after The Petrified Forest, it's still in that "early" period for Bogie where he's starting to get better roles but they're just not hitting like they will starting in '41. He's fantastic in it as a blue collar worker who's pride is shattered when he doesn't achieve what he was expecting which leads him down a long road of hatred and pain. Maybe you can argue that the ending feels a little too preachy but with Bogie in the role he keeps it fresh and feeling real.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 26, 2023 7:01:03 GMT
Watched him in Black Legion about two weeks ago. Released a year after The Petrified Forest, it's still in that "early" period for Bogie where he's starting to get better roles but they're just not hitting like they will starting in '41. He's fantastic in it as a blue collar worker who's pride is shattered when he doesn't achieve what he was expecting which leads him down a long road of hatred and pain. Maybe you can argue that the ending feels a little too preachy but with Bogie in the role he keeps it fresh and feeling real. This period is pretty insane for him - 7 movies in 1937 (!) - going across leads, 2nd or 3rd billed and hitting a pretty diverse cross section of stuff - crime films (including Dead End), a comedy (!) and Black Legion's social angle ......quite a pivotal year....... |
|
