Stephen Boyd


Hugh Griffith walks off with the Oscar as Best Supporting Actor, yet Boyd's performance totally ignored. Incomprehensible.

reply

Another reason why a "best" Oscar, in any category, really does not cut it. Some years there are several Really Good entries, all of which deserve an award - and some years, there are none.

... and Not that there was any problem with what Hugh Griffith did in Ben Hur - because there wasn't.

As for Stephen Boyd - it has been argued that his performance in Ben Hur is "over the top."
I would submit that it is his Character that is over the top - and that Boyd's performance of it is Exactly what is called for.

Can anyone imagine, for one little minute, that Boyd did not come across as Messala, Just the way William Wyler wanted him to?

reply

If it was really the „prevailing opinion“, that Stephen Boyd acted "over the top" in his role as Messala, he certainly would not have won the Golden Globe Award – but he did (BTW: Charlton Heston, who was also nominated did not win).

For me, Stephen Boyd manages to steal all his scenes in Ben-Hur, even when he is seen together with Heston as the leading actor and popular figure. 

I recently found this article concerning this issue:
http://bobbyriverstv.blogspot.de/2012/11/overlooked-by-oscars-stephen-boyd.html

reply

Totally agree, always thought that Stephen Boyd's Messala was superb.

reply

Yes, superb. It was really fortunate that Stewart Granger refused or missed the role. I mean, he was fine in films like 'Bhowani Junction' (1956) as a British army colonel in India (Colonel Savage!), among other things because he really was or had been a British army officer and was the son of another British army officer, or as a British adventurer in Colombia in 'Green Fire' (1954), but as Messala...

As Apollodorus in 'Caesar and Cleopatra' (1945) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlevWsB9nc8 he was somewhat ridiculous, but well, maybe he was too young... Messala required a tough guy like Stephen Boyd, born in Northern Ireland, 18 years younger than Stewart (born in Kensington, London), who was superb, as you say. In 'The Man Who Never Was', three years before Ben Hur, he was pretty good too as Patrick O'Reilly, an IRA man working as a spy for the Germans in 1943, in the Second World War.


Rower No. 42: "Forty-one, why did he do that?" Rower No. 41: "I don't know".

reply

i thought Stephen Boyd was wonderful. I really admire that they made no effort to soften the character and make him more sympathetic. Right to the end he was a nasty piece of work - even on his deathbed.

reply

Totally agree. Boyd's performance was magnificent - he should have won Best Supporting actor at least.

reply

I agree.

reply

I use to think his performance was too wooden but in the fullness of time I see he really succeeded in communicating his character.

reply

For all this, he also loses the prize, in his performance in "The Oscar" (1966), as well as ruined.
A coincidence ?

reply

I too believe that Stephen Boyd was robbed. Sometimes I wonder if the main reason he lost was the sheer "hateability" (hateableness?) of his character, vis-a-vis the roguish, hot-tempered charm of Griffith's Ilderim.



A jester unemployed is nobody’s fool.

reply

At that time, the Oscar was never presented to an actor who played a villainous or unsympathetic role.
If it was, then Ann Blyth would have won as Best Supporting Actress for MILDRED PIERCE as well as Jean Hagen for SINGIN' IN THE RAIN.

IMO, Hugh Griffith's character was a semi-buffoon and Boyd should definitely have won the Oscar.

reply

[deleted]

to: apriceaboverubies29 - You're absolutely right about Boyd's acting, & he also played a key role in figuring out who should be considered the main author of the screenplay. There's tons on that subject at bobbrakemanmovies.com (#990).

reply

Stephen Boyd is magnificent as Messala. The death bed scene alone was worth an Oscar!

How he missed out on a nomination to Hugh Griffith is & always will be a mystery to me!

reply

All of you are right about Stephen Boyd's performance, but for some nutty reason I really liked Hugh Griffith.

reply

I think it was definitely the hate factor for a really evil character, which of course he played superbly.

Semper Contendere Propter Amoram et Formam

reply

I absolutely agree. Even though Masalla was genuinely happy to Judah and his sister and mother, the minute Judah says that he won't help Masalla, he does an instantaneous 380* turn to torturing the Ben-Hur family. Quite the sociopath, Masalla was.

Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night.

reply