 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.55.157.22
In Reply to: RE: Casablanca:What makes it great? posted by Scott Woebcke on November 22, 2009 at 18:53:21
...and shared history between Bogart and Ingrid Bergman, the stuff that is unsaid yet implied and silences thick with feeling and longing - choices made, and finally accepted.
What's the addage: "having loved and lost rather than having never loved at all"?
Then there is the maturity of adults to let go rather than to take what seems expedient for the moment.
What weirded me out at the end was the implied homosexual relationship between Rick and the Commissioner - or am I reading way too much into "a beautiful friendship"??
Follow Ups:
I believe you are. I've seen the film, at least, 50 times and never got that impression.
-Wendell
My not being alive in the era of the film places me at a dissadvantage to interpret subtle filmic shorhand and innuendo that had to slip by censors of the time. Sex isn't the only force driving characters in Casablanca.
I need a better understanding of director Michael Curtiz.
A great classic.
Actually, the beautiful friendship comment was only intended to demonstrate they were both birds of a feather - cynical realists. Suggest you watch it again.
The pair were both cynical, self-serving types from the very beginning. The friendship comes from the realization, that, in spite of their supposed nature, they were capable of acting against their nature -- to be altruistic.
The idea that cynical, world weary types secretly long for an opportunity to be noble would appear, to us cynical types, as hopelessly corny. I think modern viewers expect a darker message or moral ambiguity so Casablanca feels somewhat dated. "The Third Man" which also deals with war/post-war profiteering, is to me, a more interesting film, because it deals out its idealism in a more complex and subtle fashion.
...I found this link/reference- (not to be confused with "cynical realism", a contemporary branch of Chinese art.)
I look forward to seeing Casablanca again (and again), as you suggest.
...sounds like you have way too much time on your hands.
I can't imagine seeing any film that much.
I may have CDs I've listened to that many times...
....20 times without getting bored, then I don't think it qualifies as a "great" film. If a movie doesn't hold up under repeated viewings, then it probably doesn't deserve the moniker "great".
There are plenty of commercial films that are enjoyable but don't hold up under repeated viewings, and they weren't meant to. That's OK, and that's the level where most people enjoy cinema.
But a "great" film, one with personal vision and artistic intent, should only reveal more of its magic the more you watch it. There are scores of movies where I find more in them every time I watch them. (I could provide a list but it'd be pretty long! I will if pressed, but you have been warned.)
The same is true of great music, great books...I never tire of Huckleberry Finn, Pride & Prejudice, Great Expectations, Sayer's Peter Wimsey novels or the historical novels of Patrick O'Brien...and I never tire of Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Monteverdi, Vaughn-Williams, Bartok, The Beatles, Steely Dan or The Clash.
...I love films but there are few I want to see more than a couple of times.
I never have understood people who collect DVDs.
There are always new films coming out to keep up with.
And I read voraciously, but never the same book twice because there is so much I haven't read yet and always something new.
I will agree with you on music. I never tire of classic rock in particular, but I would include blues, surf, oldies, some disco and jazz - even some new stuff.
I saw it first when I was 8 and I'm now 58. I watch it, at least, once a year. I never tire of it.
-Wendell
What weirded me out at the end was the implied homosexual relationship between Rick and the Commissioner - or am I reading way too much into "a beautiful friendship"??
You certainly have a problem...With yourself!
It's a profoundly romantic film and, understandably, seems meaningless to many in this age of instant gratification. (That's not a cheap shot at anyone who just doesn't like it, but one possible explanation.)
Also, for me, the loveliness of Ingrid Bergman is a major factor, as was Audrey Hepburn's in her earlier films.
Bogart's stilted version of masculinity is, I think, more amusing than anything else. And, yet, we believe that he loved.
The OP is right about suspending disbelief. If you can't, the film means nothing.
I'm still processing your point about a homoerotic subtext: a good excuse to dust off the DVD come the weekend!
...homoerotic subtext myself.
And I don't think it is there by intention of the writers or director.
But I'm not offended by that reading of it.
I guessI've probably seen in 25 times in my 50+ years. Holds up well IMO. If you can't watch something 20-30 times or more then it's not a *great* film IMO.
Donīt look there are not.
.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
