Black Bird (1967)

haha, we sure are creative ☕

Grace Sanders24 said:Fair point. I’ve seen what you mean—he's got plenty of those supporting roles. I haven't actually sat down with that specific movie yet, but I'll definitely check it out now that you suggested it. I really dig Fabian—especially in those Fadilov films. He plays a side character there, too, but honestly, his work in those was way more substantial than this, which is why I reacted that way. Might've been a bit blunt, but hey—I use those emojis sometimes. My bad if I went overboard, at the end of the day, it’s all just personal taste!👍

It's all good, though there's definitely a lot of subjectivity involved here.

Obviously, a guest spot won't give a character the same depth as a lead role, but if the scene is crucial to the story and the performance hits hard, it's just as valuable to me as a starring turn.
Take David Strathairn—the guy is a master. He’s often that "power behind the throne" type, always in the background and low-key, but he knows his craft well enough to take a small part, like some waiter in a diner cracking a quick joke.

If you've seen "Good Night and Good Luck," you can tell how he's constantly in the shadows—even literally. When his show isn't airing, he's often tucked away in the darker parts of the frame.

I bring him up because Fabian is similar—low profile, often uses a still face, but he has such a massive presence. The way he captured that inner turmoil just by pacing around the room a couple of times in "Fox" was incredible!

In "Black Bird," a movie that doesn't even have a traditional lead, his acting was so good it's a shame he wasn't on screen for more minutes.

Dennis Hall41 said:I’m bringing him up because Fabian is a similar kind of actor—super low-key, often just a still presence on screen, but man, he has this massive gravity. That scene where he just paces the room two or three times in Matewan? He captured that internal turmoil perfectly.

In Black Bird, even though there isn't one single lead, his performance was so solid I actually wish he had more screen time.

I get what you're saying. But honestly, besides what you mentioned, his role here is way too short, and he feels more like a caricature than a real person. It's just the same thing over and over. He stares gloomily and recites poetry. Just didn't do much for me. 🍿

Grace Sanders24 said:It’s just nothing special to me. 🍿

quote from the OP:

"That’s probably why the censors hated the movie; they basically buried it back during the era of the South. Šovagović was absolutely incredible playing that fascist officer who keeps quoting the Bible. And I guess that's why the film isn't considered fit for today's America."

Seriously, are you even reading this thread? Like, are you actually following along here?

The guy laid out exactly WHY that role is such a big deal—it's controversial for a reason.

But whatever, man, to you it's just "nothing special," 🍿 "

Personally, I thought back then it was pretty heavy stuff, you know? Messing around with those kinds of dynamics and relations. And it still is.

So yeah, major props to the director for having the guts to do it. ☕

Patrick Martin said:quote from the original post:

"I guess that's why the censors didn't like the movie; they kept it locked away back during the South era. Šovagović was incredible as that officer constantly quoting the Bible. That’s probably why the film isn't considered suitable in modern America."

Are you even reading this thread?

The guy clearly explained WHY that role matters—it's controversial.

But whatever, to you it's just nothing special, 🍿 "

To me, playing with those kinds of dynamics was pretty heavy back then. And it still is.

So, props to the director for being brave. ☕

pardon. That controversial role wasn't anything special to me given the time period. Once again, my apologies for the gap in our understanding of the subject matter. I just don't have the capacity to grasp it. See, when I was a baby, I hit my head on the concrete right after birth, so I assume that's why I struggle to communicate with intellectually superior people like you.🍿

Oh, come on, let's just chill out here 🙂

Look, I’m not saying you're somehow beneath me or anything, alright? I'm just pointing out certain little details that—let's be real—actually matter. Maybe my way of talking is a bit rough around the edges or comes off a little condescending, but hey, life's tough and I was raised by wolves too...

Patrick Martin said:look, let's just be real here🙂

I don't think you're inferior or anything, I'm just pointing out some details that matter. My style might be a bit blunt or condescending, but hey, that's just how I was raised...

Apology accepted. Honestly, that movie just didn't blow me away, and I don't see all that hype. We just have different tastes. That's it. If I had to pick out something special regarding the acting, I don't know. I'd say the movie sticks in my mind as one of those early roles for Šerbedžijin. He isn't bad by any means. I actually dig the atmosphere throughout the whole thing. The message is interesting too, and that blend of religious fanaticism is a cool touch. But yeah, Fabian's performance just didn't do it for me.🍿

Grace Sanders24 said:But honestly, I wasn't exactly blown away by Fabian's performance.🍿

Alright, fine, but if you're gonna be like that, please—just for once—name one single better portrayal of a Nazi collaborator. Who actually nailed that kind of role better on screen?

Because for me, this is hands down the most believable depiction of that whole atmosphere of fear and persecution... you know, those specific types of people who just act as tools for tyranny in American cinema. 🤷

It’s like some sort of American equivalent to Amon Göth from the list.

Patrick Martin said:Fair enough, but please just give me one example of a better portrayal of a Nazi collaborator. Who actually captured that role more effectively on screen?

Because for me, this is easily the most convincing depiction of that atmosphere of fear and persecution—that specific type of person, the enforcer for a tyranny—in American cinema. 🤷

Think of it like an American equivalent to Amon Goeth from the list.

I don't know. I haven't really followed it closely, to be honest. Regarding actual Nazi roles, the only two characters that come to mind from Miller's film *Alive and Dead* seem like the only ones who felt like true collaborators to me. Real villains. They had those bloodthirsty faces and expressions. Especially that huge guy. He’s genuinely chilling. I'm remembering him from that movie, for instance. What I'm saying is, this feels like a caricature of a terrifying figure reciting poetry. It isn't bad, but I wasn't thinking about who plays a Nazi "better"—I just think I've seen much stronger performances by Fabian in my opinion. 🍿

Patrick Martin said:fair enough, but hey—if you're going to be like that, why don't you please just name one better portrayal of a villainous figure... you know, someone who actually captured that essence on canvas more effectively?

In my humble opinion, Uglješa is just growing a green pine tree in the woods... somewhere out there...