Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Casablanca Effect and Its Obverse
I suppose I need to start by explaining what I mean by “the Casablanca Effect”. It’s not my idea or term. A decade or so ago, I read an article by an author whose name I can’t recall who described what he termed “the Casablanca Effect” referencing the classic 1942 movie. He described how both he and his brother (separately) had heard and read for years how great the movie Casablanca was, and when he and his brother (separately) eventually saw the movie, it more than lived up to expectations. When they became aware of each other’s experience they gave it the Casablanca Effect moniker, something which comes highly recommended (a movie, a book, a restaurant, a location, anything really) and lives up to expectations.
Some years earlier, I’d had a similar experience (just 180 degrees out of phase) with a sibling – my sister. One year at Thanksgiving we decided to watch Breakfast at Tiffany’s. Neither of us had ever seen the movie, but we’d both heard only good things about it. It had been nominated for several 
Academy Awards and had won a couple, its theme song was a well-deserved staple, film critics then and now all seemed to have nothing but good things to say about it, it was directed by Blake Edwards of Pink Panther fame, and it starred Audrey Hepburn. What could go wrong? However, when we watched the movie we both had the same thought: what a letdown! This movie not only doesn’t live up to the hype, it’s really just kind of a bad picture. The highlight of the movie is probably the opening sequence.
From there, the movie slides rapidly downhill. There’s no real plot to speak of. Holly Golightly (Ms. Hepburn’s character) is looking to marry a rich man when she becomes friends with Paul Varjak (played by George Peppard) a struggling writer who has just moved into her building. The main characters are neither very interesting nor much worth caring about either. She’s essentially a high-end prostitute who uses people, is unsympathetic and full of vapid thoughts, while Mr. Varjak is a gigolo, the kept man of an older married woman, although he has enough self-respect to dislike the situation. Even the minor characters add little of value to the story. The Buddy Ebsen character is just downright creepy and pathetic, while the Japanese landlord of their building (played over the top by Mickey Rooney with every possible negative stereotype of the Japanese) has not aged well to put it charitably. In fact, the Rooney character is about the only thing modern critics see fit to criticize the movie. But then again, his character existed for the sole purpose of comic relief in a movie labeled a romantic comedy and, while there are bits of romance in the story finding the comedy in the story is a more difficult task.
I mentioned Ms. Golightlys’ unsympathetic nature above. Let me illustrate my point by posting the final scene of the movie in which she kicks her cat out of the taxi in the middle of New York City. Tell me who would treat their own cat so poorly?
Well, I didn’t mean to write a movie review, something I’m not very adept at. In fact, I (and I’m sure you the reader as well) would much rather hear what @titustechera or @jameslileks have to say on the topic. The purpose was to explain the Casablanca Effect and its opposite and to ask the good members here at Ricochet if they’ve ever experienced “the Casablanca Effect” or its obverse, and if so feel free to tell us about it. Again, the Casablanca Effect can be about anything – a locale, a person, an event. – you name it.
Published in General
The Grateful Dead. Deadly boring.
They’re on my list too. They sang off-key. Why didn’t anyone ever mention that?
My wife just bought us season passes. I love going in all the seasons. This will be the second time we’ve bought season passes.
You have to admit that that’s pretty far.
And I agree about Kurosawa, though I wasn’t particularly impressed with his rendition of Dersu Uzala. But the few others I’ve seen were great.
The Beatles really are good. If not as good as their more ardent supporters insist, well, those of us who know they are not in fact bigger than Jesus can still find them to be plenty amazing.
I dislike them immensely though because of the symbolic effect they’ve had on the culture. Not even largely their fault, but if the ’60s takes ’em as their symbol then I’ll treat them as such.
On the opposite side… Bruce Springsteen. Can’t understand what anybody sees in that guy.
Yeah, these sentiments I can understand with a bit of a qualifier: I think early in their respective careers, the Beatles and Springsteen showed real talent only to get overwhelmed by their own hype.
I don’t know. Abbey Road was the Beatles what, next to last album, and it was a killer.
Yeah … I’m hard pressed to think of a song that everyone says “You must hear this before you die!” that isn’t also so overplayed that you can’t even remember the first time you heard it. Between cartoons animating the classics and shops playing Muzac versions and commercials licensing pop songs, by the time you find something obscure enough that you haven’t heard it before, it’s too obscure to get a real Casablanca effect. I mean, Bohemia Rhapsody has a Muppet version, for crying out loud.
How about
or
Never heard of them. Which proves my point. :D
Hehe . . . hard to do! Lots of us love our pets, even if we wake up at 3 AM hearing one of our cats hacking up a hairball . . .
Depends on the profession. Hehe . . .
True but good music..
Did they make any decent movies in the 60’s and 70’s – a lot were so cheesy…
Ah. I was referring to the “You must hear this before you die.” part. Which I think you should for these tunes.
I just had this experience with The Big Lebowski. I watched it 2 days ago, after a glowing recommendation from a couple of guys at work. I admit that my hopes weren’t very high, as they also mentioned the brilliant comedy displayed in every Will Ferrell movie ever made.
The only thing that I got out of The Big Lebowski was a desire to try a White Russian again. I don’t think that I’ve had one in 30 years. This was Jeff Bridges’ favorite drink in the show. Given the nature of the movie, however, I worry that the drink might be another disappointment.
I agree with the criticisms of Breakfast at Tiffany’s, and didn’t really like anything by Audrey Hepburn, except My Fair Lady, and in this case, it was the story and music that I liked (though she gave a creditable peformance).
If someone wants to test out my favorites to see if they disappoint, they are:
I was disappointed with The Big Lebowski, too. It was OK, but not worth the raves. But tastes differ. The guys at work thought Hangover was really funny. It left me cold. But then, I was never big on Jerry Lewis, either.
I would suggest folks look at the whole scene, including the turn-around and “redemption.”
Ignoring the Casablanca effect, I’ve always thought ‘A Man for All Seasons’ was up there with Casablanca as a great movie and an excellent character study . ‘Ike: Countdown to D-Day,’ starring Tom Selleck is also a great study of character.
No, I won’t shoot you…I’ll totally agree with you. And, I’m the same way about Harry Potter. I read it because my youngest son was SO impressed with it. Blah. It did nothing for me. I can, however, read many other books, over and over again–My Antonia or Death Comes to the Archbishop, both by Willa Cather. So, taste is taste…
I knew there was something I liked about you.
“A Christmas Carol” (all versions) was once loved, but it started to annoy me years ago. Thanks to Terry Teachout’s recent WSJ piece for articulating the reasons for my annoyance.
Here’s Elaine Benes’ take on The English Patient
Pretty much my take as well. Interminable, self-important, and utterly devoid of anything resembling heart.
They made several good (and some great) movies in the 60’s and seventies, though your tastes(and definition of cheesy) may differ.
To name a few(1960s):
1. Lawrence of Arabia
2. Tom Jones
3. Dr. Strangelove
4. The Dirty Dozen
5.Becket
6. The Lion in Winter
7. The Sand Pebbles
8. The Sound of Music
9. Mary Poppins
10. A Thousand Clowns
And from the 1970s: The Godfather, The Sting, Fiddler on The Roof, Network, Rocky, The Hospital, The French Connection, The Last Detail, and The Longest Yard.
Dr. Zhivago.
That can be said of many of the films he is in.
The Harry Potter books suffered greatly from a timid editor unwilling to cut, cut, CUT superfluous and self-indulgent pages of prose. Deathly Hallows could easily be cut in half and be a much, much better book. Half-Blood Prince could stand to be cut by 2/3rds and Order of the Phoenix by about 1/4. All of the House Elf stuff is just annoying.
Once an author gets famous enough that the editors don’t want to cut any of their stuff anymore their work goes to crap. See George R.R. Martin, Neal Stephenson, for a couple more examples of this effect.