|
|
Post by gerald424 on Jul 30, 2023 2:20:17 GMT
There are many of these "first time" videos about music floating and I normally don't bother watching them because 1) I think the reactions are fake and over done. And 2) How could you be on this earth so long and never heard a song by the Beatles etc...
But, this video is about the film Casablanca (1943). And I believe this couple was honest in their comments and actually gave the film a chance. They admit they hadn't heard of any of the actors nor were they enthusiastic about watching a black and white film. But, their fans suggested it and they gave it a shot.
What got me was remembering the first time we saw this film. There are little details we may have forgotten over the years. If you truly don't know the film, there is a bit of suspense and a few twists. And for those who wonder how to get younger people to watch classic films, this might give you a bit of insight into what they might be interested in. It was very good that they noticed the music, drama and how being black and white adds to the overall feel of the film.
Anyways, I thought it was interesting and wonder what some of you think.
(first time I inserted a video. I'll fix it if it goes wrong)
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Jul 30, 2023 5:41:10 GMT
It's cool. Thank you for posting it. I only watched about half, not because I wasn't enjoying it, but because I couldn't give it more time. I agree their reactions seem genuine - I love how shocked they both were when they learned that Ilsa was married to Laszio, even when she was with Rick in Paris.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrea Doria on Jul 30, 2023 11:33:54 GMT
Thanks, Gerald, that was interesting. The girl did most of the talking, but it was the guy (Jay?) whose face melted sweetly during the love scenes. Romance or not, I've always thought Casablanca is ultimately a man's movie. If you identify with Rick, his cool suave demeanor, his undying love for Ilsa, and his great sacrifice in the end is just wonderful. Rick is one of the great film heroes. On the other hand, if you're a woman who identifies with Ilsa, it's still a great movie, but as you see with this girl, there are moments when you question her strength of character, and that takes something away from it for some of us.
|
|
|
|
Post by cineclassics on Jul 30, 2023 11:59:27 GMT
One positive that can come out of these Youtube reaction videos is that it is opening up an entire world of cinema to younger generations.
I remember watching a reaction video the other day of a self proclaimed Gen-Z "filmmaker" reacting to Raging Bull. He said he had never seen it and when the text "directed by Martin Scorsese," appears, he states, "Oh, wow, Scorsese directed this, I didn't know."
How could you be a "filmmaker," with a college background presumably in film (because he does use a lot of filmmaking terminology), and not know Scorsese directed Raging Bull? I think the next generation of filmmakers are seriously lacking fundamentals in film history. If these type of movie reactions can open the door to the average viewer AND even educate self-proclaimed younger filmmakers, all the better for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jul 30, 2023 14:22:45 GMT
One positive that can come out of these Youtube reaction videos is that it is opening up an entire world of cinema to younger generations. I remember watching a reaction video the other day of a self proclaimed Gen-Z "filmmaker" reacting to Raging Bull. He said he had never seen it and when the text "directed by Martin Scorsese," appears, he states, "Oh, wow, Scorsese directed this, I didn't know." How could you be a "filmmaker," with a college background presumably in film (because he does use a lot of filmmaking terminology), and not know Scorsese directed Raging Bull? I think the next generation of filmmakers are seriously lacking fundamentals in film history. If these type of movie reactions can open the door to the average viewer AND even educate self-proclaimed younger filmmakers, all the better for it.
And to be honest, some of us came into it wanting to be the next James Cameron (post-Terminator) not the next Martin Scorsese. It's generational, the ones you look up to and want to emulate.
Also, because there are so many decades of cinema history with so much content in each year, it is possible to miss a whole genre or director or star and the work associated with that genre, director or star if your focus or interest is on something else in film.
After I graduated, I went to live abroad for about two years. When I came back, I continued to educate myself in film...but this meant catching up on new releases and also digging into film history into those areas I had missed in film school. And it always surprises me when I come across something I probably should have heard of before, but haven't.
Oh, and a confession...I have never seen CASABLANCA all the way through. I fell asleep midway into it the only time I tried to watch it....probably because it was a rainy Saturday afternoon and I hadn't gotten enough sleep the night before, not because the film was boring or sleep-inducing! I am sure it's a wonderful film. But here I am, a film school grad, with all these years of watching cinema, and I haven't seen CASABLANCA and I have not seen a lot of Michael Curtiz's other work. I don't even think I've seen half of Martin Scorsese's films either. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Jul 30, 2023 14:35:10 GMT
One positive that can come out of these Youtube reaction videos is that it is opening up an entire world of cinema to younger generations. I remember watching a reaction video the other day of a self proclaimed Gen-Z "filmmaker" reacting to Raging Bull. He said he had never seen it and when the text "directed by Martin Scorsese," appears, he states, "Oh, wow, Scorsese directed this, I didn't know." How could you be a "filmmaker," with a college background presumably in film (because he does use a lot of filmmaking terminology), and not know Scorsese directed Raging Bull? I think the next generation of filmmakers are seriously lacking fundamentals in film history. If these type of movie reactions can open the door to the average viewer AND even educate self-proclaimed younger filmmakers, all the better for it.
And to be honest, some of us came into it wanting to be the next James Cameron (post-Terminator) not the next Martin Scorsese. It's generational, the ones you look up to and want to emulate.
Also, because there are so many decades of cinema history with so much content in each year, it is possible to miss a whole genre or director or star and the work associated with that genre, director or star if your focus or interest is on something else in film.
After I graduated, I went to live abroad for about two years. When I came back, I continued to educate myself in film...but this meant catching up on new releases and also digging into film history into those areas I had missed in film school. And it always surprises me when I come across something I probably should have heard of before, but haven't.
Oh, and a confession...I have never seen CASABLANCA all the way through. I fell asleep midway into it the only time I tried to watch it....probably because it was a rainy Saturday afternoon and I hadn't gotten enough sleep the night before, not because the film was boring or sleep-inducing! I am sure it's a wonderful film. But here I am, a film school grad, with all these years of watching cinema, and I haven't seen CASABLANCA and I have not seen a lot of Michael Curtiz's other work. I don't even think I've seen half of Martin Scorsese's films either. |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Jul 30, 2023 14:45:16 GMT
I think I can speak to this a little. When I attended film school at the University of Southern California in the mid-90s, we were focused on specific films and movements in film history. This was of course in terms of how the courses were designed, what a syllabus might include. Some courses were required, others were electives. So if you chose to focus on musicals you might have taken those types of courses as your electives, and not taken a class that focused on the type of films Scorsese made.
And to be honest, some of us came into it wanting to be the next James Cameron (post-Terminator) not the next Martin Scorsese. It's generational, the ones you look up to and want to emulate.
Also, because there are so many decades of cinema history with so much content in each year, it is possible to miss a whole genre or director or star and the work associated with that genre, director or star if your focus or interest is on something else in film.
After I graduated, I went to live abroad for about two years. When I came back, I continued to educate myself in film...but this meant catching up on new releases and also digging into film history into those areas I had missed in film school. And it always surprises me when I come across something I probably should have heard of before, but haven't.
Oh, and a confession...I have never seen CASABLANCA all the way through. I fell asleep midway into it the only time I tried to watch it....probably because it was a rainy Saturday afternoon and I hadn't gotten enough sleep the night before, not because the film was boring or sleep-inducing! I am sure it's a wonderful film. But here I am, a film school grad, with all these years of watching cinema, and I haven't seen CASABLANCA and I have not seen a lot of Michael Curtiz's other work. I don't even think I've seen half of Martin Scorsese's films either.
Probably because it didn't grab me, the part I saw before I fell asleep...so it never became compelled let's-finish-it viewing (for me), and I always thought, well I have two copies of it, I will try again some Saturday afternoon but that seems to have been put off indefinitely. I am sure I will eventually sit down and look at it again.
The other reason is that because it has become a holy grail of Warner Brothers moviemaking and it's so lauded (almost too lauded by people) for me it became an intimidating thing...like if I went back to it, how on earth could I possibly like it as much as everyone else, when the first part didn't really captivate me. So that side of me decided hey maybe there is a film not for me, but for everyone else, and I am okay with that. Like I said, I will probably try watching it again at some point and I may end up adoring it...but right now it doesn't feel like essential viewing.
And I bet part of my resistance to CASABLANCA has to do with the fact that it feels like a type of pizza or a type of sex that all the converted souls think everyone else should enjoy in exact the same way. I am too much an independent thinker to just jump on some sort of traditional bandwagon for the sake of it, though I do revere and practice many traditions! LOL I don't have to watch CASABLANCA to be part of the human race. But I think if watched CASABLANCA and didn't really like it and told everyone that, then yes they would drum me out of the human race. LOL |
|
|
|
Post by sepiatone on Jul 30, 2023 15:21:54 GMT
Really TOP. You should make an effort to watch the movie all the way through if only to be able to round out your film school "education".  As for me, I first saw the movie on TV when it was about 22 years old. Which made me almost 14. I found it interesting in spite of it being black and white(and as the TV in our house was also black and white, everything I saw on it was, so I was pretty much used to it.) It was the first movie I saw Peter Lorre in that wasn't a horror/thriller. And I always liked him anyway. And the Claude Rains prefect of police character was also interesting. Plus the added humor of telling Rick, "I'm shocked! Shocked!! to find gambling has been going on here." just a few seconds before someone runs up and hands him a wad of currency bills saying, "Your winnings, sir." And too, it could be because I liked Bogart and would probably have liked this movie despite anything else. But I've never been(and still) very pretentious, analytical or academic when watching and forming opinions on movies. It either strikes my fancy or doesn't. And really doesn't make any movie a bad one if it doesn't, as I do realize different people react differently from others regarding movies, music and such. Now, I don't think anyone HAS to like this movie. But don't dislike it without ever seeing it. Sepiatone |
|
|
|
Post by sewhite2000 on Jul 30, 2023 16:09:00 GMT
I'm not as cynical as you about the possibility that these YouTubers have never heard "Norwegian Wood" or seen Casablanca or whatever. My beother has two girls, both in their 20s now, who could be poster children for this phenomenon. I know less about the movies they've seen, but one of them is really into Taylor Swift, the other the Jonas Brothers. Apparently Swift has been around so long now (close to 20 years?) that she's calling her current world tour the "Eras" tour, because she self-perceives her career as being divided into distinct "eras", a term that bears no irony for my nieces. They accept it at face value. I would say they find any acts older than her so alien and so boring that they would be asleep within five seconds of listening to any of them. My older niece did surprise me by watching the Peter Jackson Get Back thing upon getting an Apple TV+ subscription on Christmas. Apparently the first episode gave a 15-minute crash course in Beatles history, so my niece was constantly asking me questions like "Did you know the Beatles used to be in a band called the Quarrymen?", and I would be like, "Uh, yeah ..." Mostly she was blown away by how attractive she found young Paul McCartney. I don't recall her ever voicing any opinion on the music. As far as movies go, I would say if it's one day older than the Harry Potter or Hunger Games franchises, they're unawae of its existence or are profoundly disinterested if they are aware.
|
|
|
|
Post by cineclassics on Jul 30, 2023 17:12:46 GMT
I'm not as cynical as you about the possibility that these YouTubers have never heard "Norwegian Wood" or seen Casablanca or whatever. My beother has two girls, both in their 20s now, who could be poster children for this phenomenon. I know less about the movies they've seen, but one of them is really into Taylor Swift, the other the Jonas Brothers. Apparently Swift has been around so long now (close to 20 years?) that she's calling her current world tour the "Eras" tour, because she self-perceives her career as being divided into distinct "eras", a term that bears no irony for my nieces. They accept it at face value. I would say they find any acts older than her so alien and so boring that they would be asleep within five seconds of listening to any of them. My older niece did surprise me by watching the Peter Jackson Get Back thing upon getting an Apple TV+ subscription on Christmas. Apparently the first episode gave a 15-minute crash course in Beatles history, so my niece was constantly asking me questions like "Did you know the Beatles used to be in a band called the Quarrymen?", and I would be like, "Uh, yeah ..." Mostly she was blown away by how attractive she found young Paul McCartney. I don't recall her ever voicing any opinion on the music. As far as movies go, I would say if it's one day older than the Harry Potter or Hunger Games franchises, they're unawae of its existence or are profoundly disinterested if they are aware. And that example you provide of young folks being completely unaware and also not caring to know of anything that was released prior to Harry Potter, is the real crux of the problem I see. And this doesn't just apply to the average person, who may not have an affinity for motion pictures. I am more concerned about the so called "filmmakers" and younger film critics who seem to possess very little knowledge on film history. Shouldn't it be a prerequisite that if you're going to critique films or become a filmmaker, that you should have an understanding and appreciation for classic cinema? I don't know, maybe I'm being too harsh and my expectations are too high, but as a Millennial, it pains me to see my generation and Gen-Z as willfully ignorant and unwilling to embrace the classics. |
|
|
|
Post by kims on Jul 30, 2023 17:52:52 GMT
My awakening that I was from a different world than the millennials was at work. New employees didn't know how to make the carriage return on a typewriter or what a Rolodex was. The rude awakening about film was from Spike Lee in an interview about his motivation to make films. His grandparents watching IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE with happy nostalgic faces and Lee couldn't identify with a film so foreign to his experiences. As years go by, these old films may become too foreign from youth's experience and disappear.
|
|
|
|
Post by gerald424 on Jul 30, 2023 19:51:45 GMT
One thing I found fascinating was, since they hadn't heard of any of the actors, they didn't just focus on Bogart and Bergman. They seemed mostly interested in Claude Rains' character. And they paid much more attention to the lesser characters because they didn't go into the movie with a specific focus. That's part of what made me interested in their particular video. They had a completely open mind and allowed themselves to be engrossed in the plot.
I would think that for the filmmakers out there, that's something to consider. How much focus goes to the stars vs. the other actors while creating a film ?
|
|
|
|
Post by sepiatone on Jul 31, 2023 15:23:44 GMT
My older niece did surprise me by watching the Peter Jackson Get Back thing upon getting an Apple TV+ subscription on Christmas. Apparently the first episode gave a 15-minute crash course in Beatles history, so my niece was constantly asking me questions like "Did you know the Beatles used to be in a band called the Quarrymen?", and I would be like, "Uh, yeah ..." Mostly she was blown away by how attractive she found young Paul McCartney. I don't recall her ever voicing any opinion on the music. Just reminded me of a routine comic Billy Crystal used to do. He'd announce, "My daughterCame up to me the other day and asked, "Hey, dad, did you know Paul McCartney was in a band before Wings?" Then he'd bend forward a little and go into his old Jew character, "Hock! Pitoo! "Yes, Yes. Sit down dollink, and let Papa tell you all bout that old good time band, the BEATLES!" "Hack! Patoo!"  Sepiatone |
|
|
|
Post by sewhite2000 on Jul 31, 2023 15:28:38 GMT
Just reminded me of a routine comic Billy Crystal used to do. He'd announce, "My daughterCame up to me the other day and asked, "Hey, dad, did you know Paul McCartney was in a band before Wings?" Then he'd bend forward a little and go into his old Jew character, "Hock! Pitoo! "Yes, Yes. Sit down dollink, and let Papa tell you all bout that old good time band, the BEATLES!" "Hack! Patoo!"
The joke about Paul McCartney being in a band before Wings goes back at least to my first developing a musical consciousness around 1979 or so. Honestly, while the Beatles still have a healthy PR system, I Personally can't fathom anyone under the age of 40 has ever heard of Wings.
|
|
|
|
Post by gerald424 on Jul 31, 2023 17:46:07 GMT
Just reminded me of a routine comic Billy Crystal used to do. He'd announce, "My daughterCame up to me the other day and asked, "Hey, dad, did you know Paul McCartney was in a band before Wings?" Then he'd bend forward a little and go into his old Jew character, "Hock! Pitoo! "Yes, Yes. Sit down dollink, and let Papa tell you all bout that old good time band, the BEATLES!" "Hack! Patoo!" The joke about Paul McCartney being in a band before Wings goes back at least to my first developing a musical consciousness around 1979 or so. Honestly, while the Beatles still have a healthy PR system, I Personally can't fathom anyone under the age of 40 has ever heard of Wings. I'm at that age also. Wings was very popular during my early childhood (I was given my first 45's in 1973), I didn't get into the Beatles until the 80's. |
|
