a masterpiece
indeed
shareAgreed.
share
MovieChat Forums > Casablanca (1943) Discussion > a masterpiece
Absolutely. Fuck Citizen Kane.
shareYes it is.
shareMy all-time #1 movie.
shareNot to pour cold water, but a recent post pointed out all the flows in the film:
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-flaws-of-1942-Casablanca/answer/Frank-Branson-2
It's still great though. :)
Most of those are goofs. Hardly “flaws.”
shareA goof is just a mistake.
A flaw is a small imperfection.
Both detract from perfection. See the dictionary.
Saying something is flawed also means there is something seriously wrong with it. I was expecting a list of plot holes, not a list of goofs. Most people on Quora have no clue what they’re talking about.
shareNo, a flaw does not mean seriously wrong. A flaw means just a small imperfection.
https://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A+flaw&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS910US910&oq=define&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l2j69i57j69i59j0i433i512l3j69i60.1363j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
That's a silly statement to specify about Quora as it would apply to any site open to the general public, i.e you.
That’s only one definition. The other is that if something is flawed that means it’s unworkable. Ie. A flawed argument (yours).
Also yes, any site open to the general public is a haven for morons and lower-intellectuals who sniff their own farts. Ie you.
Don’t argue semantics with me, as you’ll surely lose.
Fortunately I know what to do with more than flawed individuals on this site who can't do better than make personal attacks. I assume by that that you enjoy having it back in your face.
shareAre you projecting, because you’re the one who started out with the personal attacks. So do you enjoy it?
shareI don't see anything on that list as a flaw in the film. It's like saying Superman is flawed because humans can't fly. That's a list of liberties the filmmakers took because they don't matter to the context of the film. The film is perfect in the ways that matter-- plot, pacing, character development, character behavior, camera work, and everything else that is important. That the airport appears closer to the center of the city than the actual airport in Casablanca is is immaterial, and not a flaw by any stretch.
shareExcellent response.
Technically, those are flaws in the film, but they are flaws the way a typo in a doctoral thesis is a flaw. If the thesis proves backwards-moving time travel is possible, it's one of the most important papers in human history, even if a typing error included a double comma, or the authors used "their" instead of "there" once.
Casablanca isn't a near-perfect film because it has no nit-pick-able flaws, but because of the stuff you cite, FilmBuff. It has no artistic flaws, even if it has some technical ones.
A great film always has flow!
shareI'd say those are the tiniest of details. They simply help attribute it to its time. When it was released, people didn't get it on Blu-ray and go online to analyze every frame like nowadays, so there was less concern about continuity. I get what one might mean about it detracting from its perfection on a technical, literal level, but I'd argue that it just lends to its charm, also in a way that wouldn't today. Ie I expect an MCU film to have top-notch editing and continuity more so than a film from this era.
shareDoes this mean to you personally that you enjoyed the movie or got less out of it? I perused your list and most of that stuff really makes no difference to anything of value in the movie. I am at a loss to understand why anyone would want to make a list like that, or what it means to them. Think of the monumental waste of humanity that happens because people waste their time on garbage like this. Everyone bickering and arguing into a frenzy over nothing. Why waste your time or throw this out for more bickering? If you wanted to apply logic to movies, look at the last half-century of almost total garbage, mind-numbing garbage that is filling the heads of people wasting their time?
shareTotal agreement. Sly, wise, funny, sincere, cynical -- just a few words to describe this perfect little B&W film.
And it's not a "little B&W film," only that it's much more contained to one setting and almost exclusively indoors, while (off the top of my head) most Masterpiece films are more sprawling and feature Vistas and that sort of thing.
This is a film about a particular group of people in a particular place who are as much similar as they are different.
Even a little B&W film like High Noon has a lot of outdoor scenes and characters who are obviously of one type or another.
Plus Casablanca is a briskly told tale, at least in my view. You don't need to be patient or watch closely to understand what's going on. I don't recall any passages that took away from the actual plot. Certainly not Sam playing the piano. What a great scene !
> You don't need to be patient or watch closely to understand what's going on.
I think you can get different things from it depending on close you watch it and think about it. It is funny that this movie was produced by a company that made plenty of movies with virtually the same actors and writers, and yet only some of them turned into the massive classics like Casablanca.
If I had to compared Casablanca to High Noon, which to me is a symbol of American movies, but not really a classic, I'd say Casablanca was an adult movie, and High Noon was kind of simple-minded.
While I agree High Noon is a much simpler tale than Casablanca and I appreciate them accordingly, having casually read about film for almost 50 years, High Noon is considered a classic for it's execution. It's very tense, quiet and believable.
I believe the photography and use of B&W is notable. Cooper embodies his character very well, and watching all the townspeople slowly abandoning him is genuinely disturbing in it's plausible accuracy.
The two films have very different aims, and yes, Casablanca is probably one of the most sophisticated popular films ever made.
Yup! I saw it earlier this year while I was stuck at home with a broken leg... and damn. It really holds up, and the themes are still timely in today's world.
A masterpiece indeed.
Casablanca is one of very few films-- I can probably count them on one hand and have fingers left over-- that hold up to today's standards, and would entertain a modern audience. I should clarify that I don't mean films back then weren't as good.-- my favorite period of filmmaking is from about 1918 to 1944, give or take-- but films today are very different, and only a few older ones seem able to work in both eras.
shareThe movies from the classic era, and the Pre-Code era were meant to tell stories to adults, not to pander to people's worst impulses, or sell product placements, or titillate with nudity, etc. Their stories may not always be perfect, but in general they had a much higher quality than today's movies, most of which I would not watch if you paid me to.
shareI find enjoyment in films of all eras, but definitely think the old studio system provided a better system of checks and balances that is lacking today.
shareNot sure if it was the studio system or the moral climate of the country. Today all limits on speech, behavior, morality ... all gone.
shareI agree, and I'm hardly a prude. The trouble with "anything goes" is that filmmakers have to keep upping the ante in order to have an impact; too many have never learned that "less is more" in many cases. What's suggested is often far more effective than what's so graphically depicted. But too many filmmakers and film viewers buy into the notion that the uglier something is, the more true & real it is, when it fact it's really just as artificial & stylized as "old-fashioned" films. And usually not as good as those older films, either.
shareThere are so many factors at play I'm really not equipped to boil it all down, but what stands out for me are is the volume of people credited at the end of a film. I used to enjoy reading the credits of a film, scanning through the names for something that looks familiar (even if only for personal reasons) and I got some satisfaction in the relaxation of being able to sit and let the movie soak in. Reading the credits was a pretty simple exercise.
Now films are absolutely ridiculous and bloated and produced by committees. I can't help but feel it takes away from the exquisite quality of the visions of a few smart people trying to create Art as opposed to Product.
Agreed.
share