Alternayte endings of the film casablanca

Casablanca It is a truly perfect movie; the 1942 Casablanca still intrigue viewers’ attention today and for a fine reason. It is an exceptional chronicle of a love triangle set against dreadfully high stakes in the war in opposition to a monster is stylish outlandish, fascinating instead of garish. This is a philosophical film that tests ones moral obligation of establishing the correct way of life. The movie gives details of the life of apolitical club owner in Casablanca, Morocco. He meets up with one of his past lovers who deserted him in Paris except she is with a new man, her heroic bewildered husband. This leaves him deeply conflicted on what actions to take or what to do. In the movie, it becomes apparent that the Nazis are high, telling lovers. However, Rick- the club owner has documents that would facilitate the two lovers to reach Portugal in one piece, which is, a neutral country during the course of World War II (Behlmer 15). In the end, Rick has to sacrifice his one desire, which is to get back together with his love. However, Rick acts in a noble manner and helps the two lovers reach safely. The contents of the film flirt with ethics and philosophy. This is for one to do something that is ethically right and according to his or her moral obligation. Casablanca is an all time favorite, masterpiece with the best love story without physical love and unique ensemble piece way ahead of time (Behlmer 17). Casablanca was produced by Hal B. Wallis and directed by Michael Curtiz, an unswerving craftsman who had by now hemmed hits such as the adventures of Robin Hood (1938) and Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942). The latter had won James Cagney an Oscar for Best Actor. Producer Wallis went through several names before landing on Bogart and Bergman. Some documentaries about the film turn out to be wrong. They simply cannot figure out the genre of the movie. Some want it to be romance; others want a war propaganda picture. It ends up being neither though it is better being a war picture than a romance. For all Curtiz’s skill and Arthur Edeson’s elegant abilities with the camera, they do not give the war picture the suspense that it needs, and they do not give the romance the tension or exoticness it deserves. (Robertson 16). Ingrid Bergmann, always a consummate actress played in between as was directed by Michael (Robertson 25). She did not show who between the two men, Rick or the freedom fighter husband; she was in love with will eventually win her heart. This is one serious flaw in Bergman`s performance, the nasty indecision in a character the clearly has already made up her mind about whom she loves, even though it does not turn out the way she expects. In the final scene, her face reflects confused emotions. She played the whole movie without knowing how it will end. Who between the two men would get on the plane? That she had no idea. She had the subtle of building all her scenes emotionally convincing. In the film, what works and what does not work? Is it the things that come out on the screenplay or the myth? It is quite unanticipated when trying to view using ones perspective by looking a little bit further. A bad technique for instance can be seen in the Paris-flashback. It is awfully made and quite lackluster for storytelling. Yes, they needed a flashback for the story to flow, but it is obvious that they did not know how to make it. It was without any concrete information and was shot on a blue screen. It lifts the film though from dark Casablanca setting and enables a smile from Bogey to be seen. That is worth for Bogart and Rick. From the same Paris-sequence, there is a German laudsprecher that makes the part comical. It is brilliantly funny when he delivers a message with a super funny US-German accent. Bogey acknowledges of not comprehending what he says as his German is a bit rusty. This is what he says from the context. On Ingrid Bergman, though she does not act much in the film, she is probably the most remembered in the film. Her fewer scenes with Bogart are absolutely brilliant (Francisco 45). In the film, she is a Norwegian in which is a bit bizarre. She should have been Swedish and neutral in the war because love cannot choose between love and war. Casablanca is one of Bogart’s best films as he owns the film. He turns it with Renault that in reality hits home. Knowing deep down in Rick there is a softer part, he praises him on anything that he does. Rick`s mood changes when he sees Isla; his motivation develops the plot. The relationship between the two men gives the film a brilliant and understandable ending as they walk out into the mist. Michael keeps everything at level pace. He does not charge the material with enthusiasm or energy, but low key direction helps the film. The entire intrigue of 25 minutes is situated in the same cafe. This is what someone today will not dare of doing. He controls the scene and lets us feel that there is nothing in the world worth seeing outside the cafe (Robertson 84). The movie is an aesthetic masterpiece despite the low budget. In conclusion, this film proposes an appealing thought of the experiment in a way of highlighting issues of differing moral obligations. For instance, Isla loves her companion Victor and desires to be faithful to him, but she faces a conflicting moral obligation to seduce Rick in order to obtain visas so as for victor may make strides towards a larger cause. The ending was made the film qualify as one of the philosophical films. References Behlmer, Rudy (1985). Inside Warner Bros. (1935–1951). London: Nicolson and Weidenfeld Francisco, Charles (1980). The Filming of Casablanca. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Robertson, James C. (1993). The Cinema of Michael Curtiz London: Routledge.