Jul 23, 2015 To many a bonafide classic, to others an overrated example of Classical Hollywood which pales in comparison to lesser known masterpieces of the time. One film which has survived the test of time through much repeat televisation. Often taken for granted as essential cinema, as a masterpiece, without much real critical debate. Often making top films of all time lists, but does it resonate with modern audiences, such as the Section 80 crew? Does it belong in our canon?
Jul 23, 2015 I think it's a great film but that popularity outweighs critical acclaim. It's one of those films that is so household that your sister or cousin knows and has seen it and acts like they know film because of it, and that a first year film studies noob thinks he's ahead of the game by knowing it. It has wide appeal and a fantastic plot which allows it to be escapist, including an escape from controversy, making it the perfect film for everyone to acquiesce into liking, if not loving, and thereby forming a super easy, taken for granted, consensus that it's great. I think in a way its an early example of how popular films gain mass attention and become famous/called great for this reason. It's the Dark Knight of 1942. and if 70 years down the road kids are seeing The Dark Knight on tv constantly and in top films lists of what will be to them early cinema they might just pre-conceivably call it a masterpiece too. I think it's super borderline canon worthy/masterpiece but that it gets included, without question, out of token generosity and history.
Jul 23, 2015 Does the laymen opinon have no place in film appreciation? There's something to be said about a film that resonates with so many people across an ever widening generational gap. It's the same with The Beatles in that you can call them overrated only because they are so universally loved that it would be impossible not to be. Art may not be exclusive to the elite, but its critical circle is. What's worse, the freshman who watches it to bolster their pseudointellect or the esteemed critic who discards it for the same reason?
Jul 23, 2015 At first i though it was overrated but after the rewatch i saw why people love it. You can definitely see it was produced to appeal to the masses so it has Hollywood all over the place, however this doesn't necessarily make it bad. The plot was really good and the performances were great, Borgart and Bergman were a great cast, both actors gave an excellent emotional charge to the film. Besides, Ingrid is my biggest crush of the era. This is not an overrated film and i think this deserves the place it has. Contrary to the case of Citizen Kane which was a brilliant picture but most people go way too far by calling the greatest of all time always. It isn't even the best of the 40's in my opinion.
Jul 23, 2015 That's a good point, and the reason why I created the thread. I don't think it's any better for a critic to discard it for such reasons, but I think that an honest non extra-textual analysis is virtually impossibly simply because of its historical role. I want us to really just look at it for what it is. To me it's just short of a masterpiece, and there are quite a number of films from the period I would gravitate to before picking Casablanca. On the other hand, it was one of the first films I saw when I began taking films seriously. And I think its popularity serves to do this really well. It can be a bridge for someone to use to cross over to the amazing films surrounding it. But I think it gets its merits for the wrong reasons. Like how Boyhood is sometimes acclaimed sheerly for its enormous task of filming over 12 years rather than for actually being an incredibly made film. It's a film with a reputation! PS: I'm happy seeing it in or out of canon. I'm not as one-sided as it might seem lol
Jul 23, 2015 An absolute classic. Timeless. Anyone who disagrees can s--- on these wealthy, white, contrarian balls. @WPG
Jul 23, 2015 Classic film obviously. I can get why some would want to exclude it (I kind of lean that way, simply because I don't love the movie), but there's really no reason to leave it off other than it's popularity which seems way too elitist/hipster for me.
Jul 23, 2015 I'll vote "yes". The tremendous ending always puts it over the top for me, with its sense of longing and of chances missed. However, I do think @FilmAndWhisky 's point is a worthwhile one. Mass appeal and even endurance over time need not correlate with artistic merit. A film can be remembered for a long time for a number of factors external to quality. With that said though, Casablanca is definitely capable of standing up to the scrutiny. Michael Curtiz's Angels with Dirty Faces is also a canon-caliber film btw.
Jul 23, 2015 Is the Canon about "artistic merit"? That kind of limits the scope of film whether iconic or historical. Let's not pretend there aren't respectable critics on both sides of the vote, no matter what movie we're discussing.
Jul 23, 2015 Yes imo...one's subjective view of artistic merit, quality, etc. For some, historical significance may be a factor worth considering...For others, not so much. And I don't think anyone is pretending otherwise.
Jul 24, 2015 as always @Twan with a worthwhile observation: Angels with Dirty Faces is dope and if you don't agree, s--- on these wealthy white balls
Jul 28, 2015 so, are there any rules in this? Films become a Section80 Canon by just winning or does it have to get certain amount of votes? the bad thing is we are not many people.
Jul 29, 2015 ^I'd say by getting most votes. I think someone (@Charlie Strangelove ?) should make some sort of catalogue/list/thread to add the films that have been voted in.
