MovieChat Forums > The Barefoot Contessa (1954) Discussion > Impressed by Mr. Bogart

Impressed by Mr. Bogart

posted 20 years ago by danhawk55
20 replies | jump to latest

Mr. Bogart really impressed me in that opening monologue. What a professional! You could see, as I've heard mentioned about him, that he really cared about his work.

In the last shot of the film, which was the same location, perhaps all the scenes where shot the and perhaps because all the shots involved rain with him getting wetter and wetter, in that last long shot he looked tired, and it's sad to think that he would only be with us for three more years.

He's cerainly one actor who always seems to be smoking, too bad people didn't know

just how much of killer it was. How many of the big stars of the golden age were

taken from us much too soon for this very reason?

But that is beauty of film, in that so much of his excellent work and all fine work is preserved, as long as humanity can (hopefully) avoid incinerating itself.

May that be forever!

Daniel

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bookratt 18 years ago

I am not impressed by the editing or the direction, unfortunately. And in most of the scenes, Bogart is so stiff and preachy and seems so tired and worn out--even in the scenes with his new love, Jenny, where he is supposed to be happy and lighthearted--that I wonder if people are impressed more by his and Ava's star power and not the actual acting onscreen, in this film?

Granted, Ava is beautiful. Her acting is probably the best I've seen from her, except for Night of the Iguana, but unfortunately, Bogart looms over every scene they're in together and ruined it for me. And I'm a Bogie fan, so that's hard for me to say.

The cinematography and location shoots were gorgeous, as were the clothes for Ava.

But the diahhrea of the mouth most of the characters exhibit in their narration is horrible. They were telling the movie (too much exposition) rather than letting us see (envision) the movie.

[–] generalusgrant 18 years ago

Bogie was always magnificent, he never gave a poor performance in his life. AVa Gardner, on the other hand, was a poor actress and one honest enough to admit it. She did give a passably good performance 10 years later in "Night of the Iguana." I felt O'Brien overacted dreadfully and was way over the top.

[–] danhawk55 9 years ago

And Ironically that the movie he won his Best Supporting Actor Oscar for... interesting isn't it.

I've heard that often the Oscar would be given to an actor for their previous performances, the heads of the studios would make "deals" with each other. Except in those rare cases where a performance was so outstanding, it swept the award from the person who would have won. Judy Holiday's performance in Born Yesterday winning over Gloria Swanson's in Sunset Boulevard, both interestingly with William Holden in the male lead role. How did he navigate being asked for his vote on that one?

[–] user1684 17 years ago

Boogie did look tired, but then again maybe that was on purpose, who knows.

Personally, I prefer him in black and white. The Maltese Falcon is my favorite. Now, there was some snappy dialouge that still resonates today.

You're right editing might have made this better.

But it sure is showing its age.

I have a feeling that the writer and director were a bit out of their element in writing and directing about the "rich and famous".

From the champagne glasses, to the way they held them, to the way they chugged it down, to the silly comments on the temperature of the champagne; the dialouge all seemed so forced and well, laughable.

The world sure has changed.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Noir-It-All 17 years ago

I saw this film without commercials last night, flipping between it and VH1's "NY77" which had plenty of commercials. It was funny to view how many frames and subject matter NY77 covered while any one scene in Contessa dragged on. I've seen plenty of films of Contessa's time period but this one seemed to have many interminable, talky scenes.

"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne

[–] Noir-It-All 17 years ago

I saw this film without commercials last night, flipping between it and VH1's "NY77" which had plenty of commercials. It was funny to view how many frames and subject matter NY77 covered at the same time as any one scene in "Contessa" dragged on. I've seen plenty of films of "Contessa's" era but this one seemed to have many interminable, talky scenes.

"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne

[–] AliciaHuberman59 17 years ago

I think the "Pretender to the Throne"'s comment about his champagne's temperature was written just to underscore how shallow The International Set was (is?) I don't think that world's changed all that much.

[–] js5905 16 years ago

The Bogart charecter did not age well. The image he personified in the earlier Warner Brothers films did not carry over into middle age. Bogart was at a crossroads in his career. His health was begining to betray him. At least we can say, that he went out on top, he was still a big star when he left us. He proceeded to have children, whom he would no doubt have been proud of, but, he knew he would never live to see them grown. After severalo attempts; he finally married well. A very interesting interview with Bogie and Bacall, on 'Person To Person,' with Edward R. Murrow, appears on YouTube. It's titled, 'Bogart and Bacall,' and they show their home and two beautiful children. Sadly Bogey only had two years left; and Murrow had less than 5. In his final broadcast, Murrow revealed he was dieing of lung cancer, and urged viewers to quit smoking. His program was sponsored by Kent cigarettes.

[–] fbm72751 8 years ago

Bogie's cancer starting showing itself when he filmed The Desperate Hours in mid 1955. His voice is often quite hoarse in lines where he has to raise his voice, not to mention he does look tired and every bit of his 55 years. Performance wise, he still never missed a cue. Its so sad that his kids Stephen was only 8 and Leslie was only 4 when he passed away.

[–] eliz7212-1 18 years ago

All I have to say about smoking is that on my mother's death certificate (12 years ago), it said: "Contributory cause of death, Cigarette Smoking".

Why on earth are the tobacco companies still aloowed to produce a product that they know KILLS PEOPLE!!!
SHAME ON THEM!!!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Marcos_d_1986 18 years ago

"Because people have the right to do what ever they please with their own bodies."

I would agree with that if cigarretes weren't addictive.

[–] ClassicAndForeignFilmLover 18 years ago

¨Why on earth are the tobacco companies still allowed to produce a product that they know KILLS PEOPLE!!!
SHAME ON THEM!!!¨

Your answer movie_nazi: ¨Because people have the right to do what ever they please with their own bodies.¨

I agree with butchkills´ answer: ¨I would agree with that only if tobacco was not addictive¨

Not only that it is physically and mentally addictive , the government goes after health supplements that they consider harmful and prohibits them, why don´t they prohibit something that they know can be a sure killer?

Marijuana is forbidden and it does not kill, it has medicinal properties.

Cigarettes should be prohibited and shame on the tobacco companies who only think on their revenue without having a conscience for the deaths they cause.

My two grandparents died of lung cancer. My grandmother died of coronary disease before she got the cancer. My cousin is on his way.

My favorite actors´ lives were taken way too young when they could have still enjoyed many years of their precious life.

If only tobacco companies would have a conscience! Shame on them and on this government for allowing them to stay on business.

" I hate you so much I think I'm going to die from it."

[–] isis_maat 18 years ago

Also (since we're into the smoking debate) while people do have a right to do what they will with their own bodies, they do not have the right to willingly cause others harm. Secondhand smoking, while not as dangerous as actually smoking the cigarette yourself, has been proven to be quite harmful. By smoking you're not only slowly killing yourself (which is your right) but could also be taking years off my life (which is not your right) simply because we happened to go to the same bar that night.

[–] ClassicAndForeignFilmLover 18 years ago

I cannot agree with you more.
But fortunately now smokers infringe the law when they smoke in a bar or in any other enclosed public place and they are forced to smoke outside or elsewhere. My worry is for those children of uncontrolled parents who smoke in the house. Some parents think that by them ventilating the house after/when they smoke, it´s OK. However, according to the statistics this doesn´t prove to be true. There is an article recently published that explains it. I´ll be back with the article or you may google it and find it yourselves.
Thank you.

Proverbs 31:8-9
Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all the unfortunate. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy.

[–] cnicknz 11 years ago

With all this talk about his smoking, lets not forget that Bogart was a raging alcoholic as well. In those years it was considered manly to drink your companions under the table, but the booze took just as dramatic a toll--especially on someone's looks--as the smoking did. Bogart was of that generation along with John Wayne and Sinatra who usually had a drink in one hand and a cigarette in the other. Thank goodness that image has died out.

[–] js5905 11 years ago

his actual cause of death was cancer of the larynx, esophageal cancer- not lung cancer. probably brought on by drinking; not smoking. you are correct.

[–] fbm72751 8 years ago

Unfortunately the corporate doctrine of Profits Before People will always be around and that includes that of big tobacco. Now days I have my own beef and hogs butchered here locally rather than taking a chance that what's in the store isn't from Mexico.