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
Yup. Lamentable but true.
The Great Escape (1963).
Tom Clancy, etc.
With Clancy it’s a little less pronounced; his earlier books were also ponderous tomes. I guess I haven’t read anything he published since his death so maybe it changed then.
A lot of people get past that being-dead writer’s block problem these days.
I wanted to make a snarky comment, but couldn’t figure out how to go about it.
His first book was edited well, but was a huge seller, which made him free to tome us to death.
Images and references to the iconic Taj Mahal are ubiquitous. I didn’t expect to be nearly as impressed with it as I was, when I first saw it in person.
I haven’t seen that yet but it’s on my list!
Me either. It gives the impression of floating a few inches above its platform.
And in so doing become PUFF eligible. Those who should know do.
Man, Patriot Games sure wasn’t. The printing I read had variations in Mrs. Ryan’s hair color and first name, and Admiral Greer’s first name among other glaring continuity problems I remember noticing at the time but cannot recall 30 years later.
Hunt for Red October: 387 pages (1984)
Patriot Games: 540 pages (1987)
See what a difference three years and one hot novel can make?
And don’t get me started on Shakespeare’s five-act ‘sonnets’.
😜
Or perhaps tomed himself to death.
I bought a Casablanca DVD when a rental joint down the street went out of business. Never saw it but always heard the hype. I watched it, waiting for all the famous lines. It was such a great movie that all those lines just faded into the story without sounding cliche. There was also dialogue that I had never heard before that blew me away. I literally teared up in the competing anthems scene.
Hearing Handel’s Messiah live for the first time was a very similar experience.
This is a good overview of Casablanca and I learned a couple things about the use of lighting in the film that I hadn’t noticed before. Enjoy.
Thank you Brian.