Curtiz

I'm not sure i get why this is panned as much as it is. What was the expectation? I mean anyone w/ an instrument can play 'Wagon Wheel'; but if they play it especially well, what's not to appreciate? It's monochrome to reflect the period & theme & the art form it is an homage to. It is stylized as such & states it is a work of fiction out of the gate. The lighting & cinematography is beautiful, the sound design & editing work hand in hand, & the performances are excellent- tho also a match to the period/genre's somewhat heightened sensibilities. Sure it could be called 'pretentious fim school' stuff; but if anyone can make a movie that looks & sounds & functions as well, they've done a fine job. I'd like to see any disparaging critic show something better. All art is subjective & a matter of opinion in the end. A critic can say the story worked & why; for me, I love the genre & the history, I appreciate the technical effort behind the shooting & editing. The actors are believable & expressive. The editing dialogue & sound all work to move things forward... A critic can point out what doesn't work. If the 'noir' genre &/or period or history aren't your thing, this might not be. If you're expecting a biopic, thisnt isn't that, as details of Cuttiz's life are left as ambiguous as his personal morals. If you're expecting a detailed 'making of' of Casablanca, it isn't that either. As a critic I can say, it is more about the ideas of art vs. artist, & those expectations surrounding the role of that art & those artists in the circumstances of war. So, see it, if that sounds in your wheelhouse & you can decide how you feel about it.

It is my belief that this film is not intended to be one "based on a true story", not a factual tale. I sincerely did not look up as to what happened on the set of Casablanca I doubt that most of what is depicted on-screen happened, but the film should be interpreted rather as a sort of reinvention, a dramatization. Thus, explained the reason for the b/w coloring: it reminds the viewer that this is not real, that it's a film. The only colour seen is the red of the "On air" light when shootings are rolling, as to suggest that those moments that we don't ever see are more real. Yet, we never actually see cameras rolling in those scenes, we don't see but the fictional story presented to us. The story incorporates a great deal of classic hollywood nostalgia, some nods to the practices that the metoo movement nowadays rightfully criticises. Ferenc Lengyel shares a damning resemblance to Michael Curtiz. His character is not presented as a positive figure, in my opinion, nor an auteur. He is a corporate director, he doesn't write the script or has creative freedom, and the film presents him in such terms. The whole movie is encompassed by some very stunning noir cinematography, several continuous takes, it's a feast for the eye. The language is mostly english, often spoken by hungarian actors, so in some cases you can hear the accent. It's not too much of a con for me, but I wanted to notify it. This is Topolanszky's first full-lenght feature. As a debut, it is quite remarkable. I'm interested in seeing more of him.

I found the film one of the best Hungarian films of the last few years. This movie was truly emotional with wonderful music and appealing acting. The script is clever, does not only show the negative human character of Curtiz but also made him seen as complex as he must have been. I liked the acting of Lengyel in the lead role with his genious way of shaping Curtiz. I think the film is mostly about identity search of a man who is a Hungarian Jewish man living in America, who is a man loving women but also a father, so in this film I can recognise the problematic character of today's person, it is not a film about history, rather a film about human emotions, the complexity of a man's character, about us who try to find ourselves in this chaotic world. Multiculturalism in the 1940's did not differ from that of today. The film made me rewatch many of Curtiz's films, especially Casablanca. I definitely recommend it to anyone who loves the world of movies, who longs for sense and sensibility in films, who would like to see passion for profession.

The sets and costums were fantastic! I would give them credit for that. It was interesting in it's basics and I liked it a little, also I just loved the actor who played Kertész.

Now let's move on to the bad things. The movie was just a nonsense. There were some things that were indeed decided during the production but there was no such drama at all. I don't think they can make up a fake story like that..

The rest of the actors were not good. Especially the girl played by Evelin Dobos. She looked nice but she ends there.

The technical part.. The cinematography! TERRIBLE! There were some longer shots that were just ruined with that spinning camera. The camera was just spinning for no reason at all. HOW can they get a "cinematographer" and a "director" like that? Seriously.. Also, there was no push at all when it was needed..

The red color idea.. Stolen from an other movie. STOP IT. Don't mess with the red color in a black and white movie. It was done before with a much bigger meaning.

The sound.. I don't know how they recorded the sound but many times it was annoying. Did anyone paid attention what they were recording? Not really. Two talking to each other, one of them sounds weird because the sound is messed up (probably the guy with the boom can't even hold it properly and nobody noticed it) and you you can hear even when one of them grabs something in his pocket while they are talking to each other -.-

The music was ok, sometimes out of the world and way too loud..

And after all this I'll just lower my rating to 5, just because of the main actor.

(Worth to check out the ratings on this one. EU voters gave it 7+, most of them 10.. Real users gave around 5-6. That's more realistic.)

One of the few grinnable moments. Dark and confusing. No sympathetic characters. Depressing account of the greatest film ever made.