Actor of the Month Canon Series: Dirk Bogarde (March 2023)

[The Dark Poet]

Let's do one of the big ones to celebrate its Criterion release later this year!

The Servant
Hugo Barrett
(dir. Joseph Losey, 1963)

If you have not seen this film, get on it. I don't want to say too much, since the entire reason I adore this film is because of the element of surprise, and not knowing where it will lead - so I will keep relatively silent on those details for now, so as not to spoil it for those who have yet to see it.

However, I will say this - I believe this was the first Bogarde film I watched (or rather the one in which I first took notice of him), and I've revisited it over the years, and find it getting even richer and more compelling the more I focus on the details. It is supposedly a two-hander, but we have to be honest: Bogarde is the film, and while James Fox is terrific, this is Bogarde's film to command, and he certainly rises to the occasion. Simulatenously sinister and sympathetic, his Hugo Barrett is quite an achievement, a feat of acting only possibly from those who fully-embrace their craft and everything it represents.

Taken from my full review:

At the centre of The Servant, and undeniably the main reason for its resounding success is Dirk Bogarde, an actor I will always maintain is one of the finest to ever work in the medium, and who consistently gave some of the most brilliant performances recorded on film. This particular role is often considered amongst his very best for a number of reasons. Some of his more notable work, such as Luchino Visconti’s Death in Venice and Alain Resnais’ Providence saw him take on reserved, straight-laced characters that are far more complex than they appear – Bogarde essentially made a career from such roles, and was exceptionally good at playing any kind of character. However, Hugo Barrett is a much bigger challenge, mainly since it requires the actor to take on a much more difficult character that can’t ever quite be pinned down, which is the antithesis of many of the actor’s more distinctive performances. He may be the central character, but Hugo is immediately established as an enigmatic bundle of curiosities and contradictions that prevent the audience from ever fully embracing him. His closely-guarded personality is gradually revealed through the process of the veneer that conceals it slowly eroding, revealing one of cinema’s most terrifying villains. His character unravels almost concurrently to the film, positioning Bogarde’s titular servant as a malevolent force of otherworldly evil, grounded in a very naturalistic and often bitterly sardonic performance that only Bogarde could convincingly give – and while we are repulsed by Hugo throughout, we simply can’t resist his sinister charms. Taking on a role like this requires the actor to adopt a predatory state of mind, as this is essentially the governing aspect of the performance, with the theme of dominance being omnipotent in the character and the film as a whole. Bogarde is perpetually on the prowl, going from meek, overly polite milquetoast to terrifying villains in a way that isn’t a radical shift, but rather the result of a slow deconstruction of our initial perceptions – his gait gradually changes, his clothes become more casual, his accent slipping from Received Pronunciation to a more working-class dialect, and his entire demeanour changing from invisible servant to unstoppable force of destruction. Yet, in the midst of all of this, Bogarde remains so elegant and understated, with a simmering complexity underpinning his performance that is rarely glimpsed here, with the actor demonstrating the right balance of careful restraint and glorious excess, depending on what the scene in question calls for. Bogarde has played devilish character before, but this was one of the few times he was truly the embodiment of pure madness and malice, and the film is all the better for it.

This is probably my favourite Bogarde performance (and an easy win for Best Actor in 1963 for me, one of I think 4 or 5 wins I give him), so I recommend seeking it out if you haven't seen it, or for those who have seen it, perhaps rewatching it regardless of what your initial feelings may have been, since it is such a rich, evocative and layered drama, and I find something new about it every time I watch it

[The Dark Poet]

Doctor in the House
Simon Sparrow
(dir. Ralph Thomas, 1954)

One of the Bogarde films that I had not seen prior to this month was Doctor in the House, and I don't have too much to say about it. I was eager to see Bogarde do something more comedic, and he certainly did deliver, although most of this performance consisted of him being the straight man while everyone around him was far more eccentric and outrageously funny. It's not the most well-made film, and some of its ideas are dated - but as expected, Bogarde is terrific, playing across from his fellow actors really well and proving that he could be funny when the material was good.

Taken from my full review:

Arguably, if there is any reason for Doctor in the House to have lingered in the cultural consciousness, it is likely due to the presence of a very young Dirk Bogarde, who plays the main character of Simon Sparrow, who goes from insecure young student to a well-respected, dedicated doctor. His journey is the foundation for the film, and it is his story that we are invested in following since he is the sole consistent thread that binds the entire film together. It is a rare comedy from Bogarde (although he did spend a decent amount of his early career in similarly simple, broad comedies), and most of what has propelled viewers to seek this film out is seeing how this notoriously serious, intense actor fared in a more lighthearted affair, especially since he was known to be a great wit outside of his more dramatic career. We soon come to the realization that Bogarde essentially gives the same kind of performance in a broad comedy as he does the most intense dramas, with only the tone of the project around him changing. This doesn't suggest that he is limited or incapable of humour - instead, he plays it completely straight, without any hint of humour, which is a bold choice, but one that actually works in the context of this film. Sparrow is not an inherently funny character, but rather an ordinary young man who finds himself in hilarious situations - and those aspects are covered by the eccentric supporting cast, who are the ones who are asked to play to the rafters. It's a good performance from Bogarde, but those who are used to his more dramatic work won't find anything necessarily different about what he is doing here. It's a charming and very funny performance, but not anything we haven't seen from actors of his calibre before, making this a change of pace for the actor, but not all that revolutionary - although much like everything else contained within this film, it never intended to be particularly groundbreaking.

However, it's not a surprise he didn't do too much comedy after this - he is much more adept at drama (especially drama where he can showcase his subversive wit), rather than a broad comedy, since it doesn't quite suit him, even if he is very good in it.

[MrStingo]

Thank you for doing this! It’s excellent timing - a month ago the only Bogarde film I’d seen was A Bridge Too Far, but thanks to a bunch of his movies showing up on television lately I’m now up to twelve and it’s been such the treat!

Such a wonderful actor and personality, I’m surprised by his relatively few major nominations…still, what a career! His transition from the 50s matinee idol stuff to what followed is a fascinating career arc. I’ve mainly seen earlier roles and can’t wait to see his later work after reading these fantastic write ups!

From what I’ve seen I have to give a little shout out to Cast a Dark Shadow - just delicious from start to finish as a dastardly cad, to say the least. Margaret Lockwood also brilliant - I’d love to see a remake, 3 great roles for actresses and a great twist.

And some choice aesthetic moments to finish -
Modesty Blaise wig reveal
The Singer not the Song…leather ensemble
Ill met by moonlight - amazing moustache work

[CitizenKian]

It's not eligible here, but the Talking Picture documentary featuring Dirk Bogarde is certainly worth a watch!

[GeorgeEastman]

Ill Met by Moonlight aka Night Ambush (Powell & Pressburger, 1957)
Sort of a spiritual predecessor to The Guns of Navarone, a decent enough war adventure film about the capture of a German general by a bunch of English soldiers led by Bogarde. Never great but never dull, worth a look if you have the time.

[The Dark Poet]

Death in Venice
Gustav von Aschenbach
(dir. Luchino Visconti, 1971)

One of the more challenging films Bogarde ever made was Death in Venice - he was certainly not a stranger to more controversial subject matter, but logically this tale of obsession was an entirely different challenge, since it tackled themes that are still considered (quite correctly) taboo, but it does so in a way where it is never about the actual act or sexual perversion, but rather the theme of desire. Visconti, as we spoke about in The Damned, had a penchant for beautiful provocations, films that dared to push boundaries in a way that was both subversive and elegant, toggling the boundary between classical and modern in a way that very few modern filmmakers have ever been able to replicate. This is why he could make something as steeped heavily in the past as The Leopard or Conversation Piece, or indeed Death in Venice, and yet have it feel so refreshing and modern in both tone and sensibilities.

But we aren't here to talk about Visconti (even though any self-respecting film-lover should be thinking about Visconti at least half a dozen times a day, we owe him so much), but rather Bogarde, who delivers one of his most complex performances in this film. One has to imagine it was not the easiest role to play - after all, Gustav von Aschenbach is not a particularly likable man (although I believe I have said this about nearly every performance I've spoken about so far), and Bogarde is essentially taking on the role of a sexual predator, albeit one that preys from afar, and never actually engages with his desire, instead allowing it to gradually destroy him from within, leading to one of the most harrowing but beautifully poetic deaths ever shown on film.

What makes this performance so special to me is how it is one that is very much dependent on Bogarde's expressivity more than it is his more formal elements as an actor - he had an amazing voice and a brilliant command of the language, and he certainly does use it here. However, the most impactful moments are those in which he is almost entirely silent, guided only by his internal monologue. We watch as his face and body tell a story, his movements and most subtle expressions capturing every emotion, every hint of desire, despair, guilt and insecurity - and he all does it with such incredible commitment. It's a physical performance more than it is a verbal one, which is already quite an achievement, and Bogare is simply extraordinary in it - but he always is, so that's not a surprise.

Taken from my full review:

Dirk Bogarde was a tragically underpraised actor, mainly because despite a long career of memorable performances in a variety of acclaimed films, he could never quite reach the level of adoration some of his peers seemed to manage to achieve. This is a shame, because not only was Bogarde just as good, he demonstrated on many occasions that he was capable of being even better in certain instances. Death in Venice required an actor who would be able to command the screen with a relatively subdued character, one that makes an imprint on the film without needing to do much. A great deal of the performance is wordless, with the role relying heavily on Bogarde’s natural expressivity. This precisely what makes his performance here so impressive – in theory, it should be something any actor could effectively do, as there isn’t much to it in a traditional sense. Yet, when you realize how much complexity is embedded within every moment the character is on screen, you come to respect Bogarde even more. Relying less on verbosity and more on the raw emotion he demonstrates, this is amongst the actor’s finest moments, and proof that he could take on any character with the same intensity and vivacious intricacy that made him one of the greatest actors of his generation, and one who needs to be seen as less as the dedicated character actor he’s often thought to be, and more as one of the most influential to ever work in the craft.

[The Dark Poet]

Victim
Melville Farr
(dir. Basil Dearden, 1961)

Dirk Bogare is often cited as being gay, and it is generally accepted that he was queer in some way, based on what his close friends and colleagues have said of him over the years. However, he never formally came out - but the reasons for that are quite clear. We all know homosexuality was outlawed in the United Kingdom until the late 1960s, and many men faced severe punishments for expressing their sexuality, which was viewed as a sordid, immoral crime, and there were many lives lost and families broken apart because of these issues.

I sometimes wonder how Bogarde felt making Victim. This was not the first film he made that focused on queer issues - we've discussed both The Servant and Death in Venice, which deal with the concept of queer desire and power dynamics. Yet, it was this film that likely hit closest to home for Bogarde. His reasons for remaining closeted were likely motivated less by his dedication to privacy, but rather his own professional and personal safety. Perhaps he may not have faced prison for being in a civil partnership, but morality clauses imposed by the British film industry meant that an actor could be blacklisted should there be any proof of their homosexuality. Victim is a film about a man confronting his own sexuality, and fearing for his safety and security, he begins to unravel into a bundle of despair as he realizes that he cannot run from the truth forever, and that he is going to inevitably face the consequences of a system designed to harm people like him.

Bogarde is extraordinary in the film, and his commitment to this part is admirable. I can only imagine what playing this character meant to him, and how he must have experienced a lot of inner turmoil when making the film, since there are elements of this story that would be reflected in the life of every queer individual in the country at the time - and considering it came only a few years before the decriminalization of homosexuality in the UK, one has to imagine it played a part in changing perceptions and allowing justice to prevail.

From my full review:

What is often most remembered about Victim is the performance given by Dirk Bogarde in the leading role. One of his generation’s most enigmatic actors, Bogarde was someone whose own personal life was deeply-guarded, with many aspects of his identity being intentionally concealed from the public. This makes his performance in this film even more striking, since he is playing a man who has to keep his own secrets in order to thrive in his career. It gives his work here even more nuance, since Bogarde’s own identity, while certainly not of any real importance, allowed him to find the intricacies in playing a man whose secrecy is not a choice, but a necessity. Moreover, on the pure level of the performance, Bogarde is doing something very impressive, finding the complexities in an otherwise ordinary figure, which was a characteristic of many of his greatest screen portrayals. Arguably, Victim doesn’t carry the prestige of some of his more notable work, such as The Servant or Death in Venice, so he doesn’t have a film that is immediately brilliant to use as a launching point for another compelling performance – instead, he is the reason why the film succeeds, with his portrayal of the closeted lawyer being the heart of the film. For the most part, he relies on a very subdued set of mannerisms, playing Farr with complete restraint and elegance – but it’s the moments where Bogarde unleashes the fury that Victim comes into its own, with his anger and despair commanding the screen, and being unexpectedly powerful, even considering how he’s an actor who has always shown impeccable abilities in any kind of role, willing to rise to any challenge and find the truth, regardless of the material. Sophisticated but brimming with fascinating characteristics that play on many of the actor’s own traits, Victim gives Bogarde one of his most insightful, complex roles, manifesting in a performance that isn’t supplementary to the film so much as it is deeply responsible for its success.

[CitizenKian]

"The hero of the film is a man who has never given way to his homosexual impulses; he has fought them–that's part of his heroism. Maybe that's why he seems such a stuffy stock figure of a hero... The dreadful irony involved is that Dirk Bogarde looks so pained, so anguished from the self-sacrifice of repressing his homosexuality that the film seems to give rather a black eye to heterosexual life."

Pauline Kael

A stellar and revolutionary film! And surely one of Bogarde's most important turns!

[The Dark Poet]

The Night Porter
Maximilian Theo Aldorfer
(dir. Liliana Cavani, 1974)

Those of you who participated in the retrospective I did on Charlotte Rampling will remember how much of a fan I am of this film (in fact, I expressly told everyone to watch this and The Damned precisely because I planned to host a Bogarde retrospective at some point, and it would essentially be killing two birds with one stones). It also helps that this is one of the most harrowing and brilliant works of the 1970s, so even beyond its incredible performances, it is well worth your time.

As one of the many morally-ambigious characters he played in his career, Bogarde is extraordinary as Maximilian Theo Aldorfer, a former concentration camp guard who has settled into a relatively sedate life as a porter at a luxurious hotel, his past being safely behind him. However, when a figure from his past re-enters into his life, he finds himself spiralling out of control. It's a brilliant two-hander between a pair of the greatest actors in the history of the English language, and while I previous spoke at length about Rampling's haunting performance, now it is time to discuss Bogarde, who is just as astonishing. He had a penchant for taking on these challenging, complex roles that pushed him to the very edges of his abilities, and he never once managed to disappoint. It is a carefully-constructed character study about a man being haunted by the ghosts of the past, and no one could have captured the simultaneous insecurity and elegance of the character quite like Bogarde.

Taken from my full review:

Dirk Bogarde was the best actor of his generation who perpetually failed to break through in the same way as his peers did around the same time – dashingly handsome and possessing the acting talents necessary to craft any character and make them his own, he was an extraordinary actor – and we can’t ever say that he never received his fair share of great roles, especially during the 1970s, where he had a streak of memorable performances that saw him working with many of Europe’s finest auteurs (in the space of only four years, we worked with French, Italian and German directors, amongst others, and was exceptional in all of them). A chameleonic actor if there ever was one, Bogarde makes full use of his arsenal of talents in The Night Porter, playing a man just trying to live his life without any controversy, which is a tall order for a man carrying the guilt of ordering the deaths of multitudes of people under his control. Bogarde is exceptional in The Night Porter, which may possibly be his finest performance, precisely because it is such unconventional territory for the actor. He oscillates between elegant and dignified, perhaps even a tad dour and disillusioned with the world, and manipulative, lascivious and passionate, which only manifests in moments where he can realize his desires, caught somewhere between cathartic rage and unrelinquished desperation. This is a very strong performance from Bogarde, with his sensitivity intermingling with the hardened nature of the character, creating someone who we can never fully understand, but through the actor’s empathetic control of the character, we can start to comprehend him, and while his past may be questionable at best, deplorable at worst, his conviction to fade into the shadow and deflect attention is brought so vividly to life through Bogarde’s committed performance that is unwavering in intensity, and certainly proves his mettle as one of the great leading men of his day.

[GeorgeEastman]

Great write-ups TDP!

[The Dark Poet]

Modesty Blaise
Gabriel
(dir. Joseph Losey, 1966)

I wanted to rewatch Modesty Blaise for this, because while I really loved it the first time I saw it about 10 years ago (my best friend at the time mentioned it to me at school, and I had not heard of it, and he famously shouted "Monica Vitti! Terence Stamp! Dirk Bogarde!" as the reasons to watch it - he was absolutely correct), I wanted to experience Bogarde's delightful performance all over again. This is by far the funniest work he ever did, and while he was good at playing unlikable and evil characters, this was one of the few times that he actively played a pure villain, someone without any redeemable qualities, and who was driven purely by a gleeful malice that we didn't often see from Bogarde, since he was a much more serious actor.

Mostly what I appreciate about this performance is that it is a chance for Bogarde to simply have some fun - he was used to playing more complex roles, so it was wonderful to see him do something far more entertaining in terms of a comedy. He makes for a fantastic villain too - an over-the-top, queer-coded antagonist with fabulous fashion and a very distinct set of characteristics. This is how you make a villain that is both sinister and very entertaining, and Bogarde is having an absolute blast with the role. We didn't see this side of him often, so it is great that we at least have one instance of him going balls-to-the-wall in terms of eccentricity, and its one of his most enjoyable performances by quite a large margin.

Taken from my full review:

The role of antagonist is occupied by the always brilliant Bogarde, who is having the most fun on screen that he had since his days of playing Dr Simon Sparrow in Doctor in the House and its sequels. The difference is that this role gives him something to work with – a camp, maniacal villain who is as evil as he is hilarious, the film is populated by several magnificent monologues, delivered in style, both physical and verbal. Bogarde’s stoic elegance and ability to capture every detail of his characters is truly extraordinary, and the part of Gabriel could have so easily been defined by excess, but under Bogarde’s careful command, he is extremely entertaining and unexpectedly complex. Modesty Blaise works because the cast is aware that they are in a comedy, but don’t lean too heavily into the humour, and the choice for them all to play it completely straight (with very few “winks” towards the audience) makes it even more entertaining, since it manages to be as well-acted as it is funny, which contributes to the overall experience.

The film as a whole is fantastic, and while I am divided on Losey (I adore The Servant, dislike Accident and I'm in the middle on everything else), this is one of his most ambitious films, and I wish we could go back to this era of surreal, big-budget comedy action films.

[BraveSirRobin]

Ugh, Bogarde in Victim, fantastic

[CitizenKian]

Ugh, Bogarde in Victim, fantastic

Right?



I do wonder what his reaction was when he read the script and finding out there’s that “FARR IS A Q——“ scene. Given how hurtful that word was during those times.