Old Movies - Not new movies.

cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/13thFloor/t/343282

> > Casablanca is a 1942 American romantic drama film directed by Michael Curtiz, and starring Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman, and Paul Henreid. Filmed and set during World War II, it focuses on an American expatriate (Bogart) who must choose between his love for a woman (Bergman) and helping her husband (Henreid), a Czechoslovak resistance leader, escape from the Vichy-controlled city of Casablanca to continue his fight against the Germans. The screenplay is based on Everybody Comes to Rick's, an unproduced stage play by Murray Burnett and Joan Alison. The supporting cast features Claude Rains, Conrad Veidt, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, and Dooley Wilson. > > > > Warner Bros. story editor Irene Diamond convinced producer Hal B. Wallis to purchase the film rights to the play in January 1942. Brothers Julius and Philip G. Epstein were initially assigned to write the script. However, despite studio resistance, they left to work on Frank Capra's Why We Fight series early in 1942. Howard Koch was assigned to the screenplay until the Epsteins returned a month later. Principal photography began on May 25, 1942, ending on August 3; the film was shot entirely at Warner Bros. Studios in Burbank, California, with the exception of one sequence at Van Nuys Airport in Los Angeles. > > > > Although Casablanca was an A-list film with established stars and first-rate writers, no one involved with its production expected it to stand out among the hundreds of pictures produced by Hollywood yearly.[7] Casablanca was rushed into release to take advantage of the publicity from the Allied invasion of North Africa a few weeks earlier.[8] It had its world premiere on November 26, 1942, in New York City and was released nationally in the United States on January 23, 1943. The film was a solid if unspectacular success in its initial run. > > > > Exceeding expectations, Casablanca went on to win the Academy Award for Best Picture, while Curtiz was selected as Best Director and the Epsteins and Koch were honored for Best Adapted Screenplay. Its reputation has gradually grown, to the point that its lead characters,[9] memorable lines,[10] and pervasive theme song[11] have all become iconic, and it consistently ranks near the top of lists of the greatest films in history. In 1989, the United States Library of Congress selected the film as one of the first for preservation in the National Film Registry for being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". > > Wikipedia

Is 25 years old enough? Hope so!

Finally watched this a couple of days ago and wow, it's a ride.

The first act hits differently to how I imagine it did in 1998. At the time neo-nazis were much more fringe than they are now, so the first act took more time than I imagine they would now to humanise the characters a way that allows you to see how they encourage each other into escalating further and further. That said, there were times when it almost felt like the movie was on their side, particularly the triumphant strings during the basketball scene. I think I read at some point that neo nazis watch the 1st act as a celebration of their culture, and it kinda reads that way. It was uncomfortable, but maybe that was the point.

The second act does a good job of showing the process of radicalisation. The young Danny has been totally consumed by the skin head gang, and we see them coaching his speech, berating him for mis-speaking, pulling him away from friends, alienating him from school and sources of guidance.

The last act is satisfying and it wraps up well, but inwont spoil it.

There are some brutal scenes, with one particular moment that I won't spoil, but is infamous. I looked away at the moment it happened but I still saw too much for comfort and the image will stay with me.

A welcome surprise came in the form of Edward Furlong's voice-overs. They took me right back to watching Terminator 2 for the 1000th time when I was 11. His voice overs as John Conner are baked into my subconscious.

All in all, I think the movie is worth a watch, and has some good points and insight. It has some flaws, and I think it might miss the mark at times when viewed from a modern perspective. I suspect these things are mostly a result of the point of time it was made, so with that in mind I do recommend watching it. Just do it on a day when you're feeling thick skinned.

I saw this movie for the first time last year and was really impressed with Ava Gardner acting performance. And of course she got the Oscar that year.

A junkie must face his true self to kick his drug addiction.

This is a really fun penny dreadful starring Lon Chaney and Joan Crawford. Great visuals and performances.

Night of the Hunter is without question, one of my favorite movies. When I saw this film for the first time, it opened my eyes to the wealth that can be found in classic cinema. The photography did things I have seen before or since. The imagery is masterful. The performances are intense. There are scenes in this film that are chilling. A visceral film.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/3151661

> Someone mentioned this film in one of our other discussions. I vaguely remember seeing it many years ago, but really couldn't remember many of the details, so I put it on this weekend. Hot damned if it wasn't so much better than I remember. Maybe the world we live in today feels a lot more relevant to the film then when I had seen it before, but I would gladly declare this film a masterpiece of it's time that holds up today. Don't let the newer remake besmirch your perception of this movie. It hits on several levels. Thinking of the context of the film, it is not difficult to see the concern that the auteurs of the time felt over the possibility, or even likelihood of nuclear war. If you haven't seen this one, it's worth your time. > > I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the film.