I strongly feel that




I strongly feel that Humphrey Bogart should have won an Oscar for Best Actor in his complex potrayal of Fred Dobbs in The Treasure of Sierra Madre. In my mind its his best performance(with Casablanca and the African Queen tied at 2nd). I just really enjoy watching his performance in this movie, he plays a character which is a complete 360 degree turn from the characters he played before: he's parnaiod, untrusting of others, greedy,savage towards at times, Bogart pulls of a brillaint performance by playing against type, and emboding Fred Dobbs's personality, in my mind its a brillaint, career performance.

reply

Yep!

reply


Hm, I could be persuaded.

And I stood where I did be; for there was no more use to run; And again I lookt with my hope gone.

reply

Tough to argue against Laurence Olivier, but Bogart should have at least been nominated.

The Academy knew of his strong dislike and distaste for them, so that may have influenced them. Bogart wouldn't even win an Oscar until nearly the end of his career. I real shame for such an amazing actor.

reply


Truly.

And I stood where I did be; for there was no more use to run; And again I lookt with my hope gone.

reply

Bogart definitely deserved to Win the 1948 Actor Oscar.

I imagine Oliver's Oscar win had a lot to do with Oliver directing Hamlet. Academy Voters were probably real conflicted as to whether to give the Director Oscar to John Houston or Lawrence Oliver. They voted Houston for Director and gave Oliver Best Actor as compensation

reply

I fully agree. This isn't my favorite role or film of his, but it is my favorite Bogart performance. In fact, it's one of the greatest performances of all time, as far as I'm concerned. Also, since I was never a big fan of Olivier's acting, in my mind Bogart easily deserved to win that year.


Hey there, Johnny Boy, I hope you fry!

reply

I disagree with all of you . I have watched a couple of Bogart movies the last few weeks and I think he is highly over rated.

reply

[deleted]

I actually agree. Everyone on here is saying that Walter Huston was the best actor in the film and that he deserved his Oscar. And I don't disagree. He was good, but IMO, Humphrey Bogart exceeded my expectations. And he did so by playing a character who is completely transformed by the end of the film.

He starts off as a very sympathetic, classic hero type. The type of role I feel Bogart often played. I soon became very invested in what was going to happen to Dobbs as the film went along. And then I realized far too late that he had become the villain of his own story right before my eyes. I didn't even know Bogart could play a villain. His character transition was so flawless and he made it look so easy! I think I seriously misjudged him as a one-trick-pony kind of actor. I understand now that he was actually quite versatile.

reply

Bogart is very versatile actor, starting off playing gangsters that weren't really developed, then you go to Mad Dog Earle, another gangster but this time with a stronger more sympathetic feel to him and not just another gangster character but one with actual depth, Sam Spade the cynical private eye, Rick Blaine the weary, love hurt, pessimistic club owner, who despite his claims for neutrality and not sticking his nose in anybody's business, comes out helping Illsa and Victor. His roles in Treasure of Sierra Madre and Carine Mutiny are I think his two best roles,these two characters show that Bogart could seriously act, in Madre he goes against type, and plays a character at first likeable but then due to his greed, he becomes despicable and unlike any performance he did before. I like Caine Munity, his portrayal of the hardened war veteran, who's slowly starting to loose his mind, after so many years.

reply