Curtiz

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.

This Hungarian production focuses on an unlikely "local hero". Michael Curtiz was a very prolific director who arrived in the US in the late Twenties, after having directed over 60 films in Europe.

Besides being prolific he was also versatile. A true "studio system" director and not an "auteur" famous for a genre or style, he never achieved great fame but did achieve great financial success. He also had a reputation for being difficult and for his dreadful English. See the "poodles" scene :-)

The plot is a fictional tale about Curtiz's estranged daughter, Kitty, coming to Hollywood and wanting to get to know daddy, during the filming of Casablanca. It is interesting to see some Casablanca sets, like Rick's Cafe partially recreated and luckily we get only glimpses of main characters Bogey and Bergman.

For unknown reasons Curtiz doesn't tell anybody that Kitty is his daughter and, given his womaniser reputation, everybody - his wife included - thinks Kitty is yet another "dame". This create some friction and minor misunderstandings, while the twins scriptwriters are busy improvising new scenes, making it up as they go. Until the very last moment nobody knew how the movie would end and they finally came up with a great ending to please almost everybody.

Casablanca was supposed to be yet another wartime movie to boost moral and it's unlikely it received special attention from the secret service, although an agent plays the "baddie".

The movie has great black&white photography, an excellent soundtrack with period songs not overused and great costumes. Shame about the acting, barely decent. The actress playing Kitty is the worst of the bunch, totally unable to be convincing but she also has the difficult task to carry the secondary, absurd main plot.

With the right title, a different angle and better actors, it could have been a great movie.

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 actually watched this film twice on Netflix. The second time I had a friend with me who loves Casablanca and claims to have seen it at least 50 times. He really liked this film and found the parts about the filming of Casablanca rewarding. We do wonder how much of the personal story is true, i.e. was Curtiz's daughter really on the set of Casablanca. For those who complained there were no subtitles for the Hungarian language scenes, in Netflix you must turn on subtitles. I have them on all the time as I am hard of hearing. It would be to your benefit to re-watch the film with the subtitles on.

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.