Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Classic Films

Showing Original Post only (View all)

thucythucy

(8,121 posts)
Sat Apr 27, 2024, 05:33 PM Apr 27

Okay, a rant about Casablanca involving two pet peeves. [View all]

First:

I was watching a reaction video to Casablanca last night which had the closed captions turned on. All well and good: I have no problems hearing dialogue myself--indeed I have pretty much memorized the entire script--but I have Deaf friends and I like to see what they might be missing, since closed captions are often notoriously bad, especially when computer generated.

This, however, isn't a computer glitch. It's been happening now for decades.

When Peter Lorre first shows Bogart the "Letters of Transit" he says, "...signed by General Weygand..."

Notice I said "Weygand." But every caption I've seen, and even some supposed screenplays posted on line, says "General De Gaulle."

Now, you'd have to be historically illiterate to believe that that's what Lorre is saying. Remember this takes place in a territory under the administration of Vichy France. De Gaulle at that time was listed by that government as a traitor, under penalty of death. Far from being documents that "cannot be questioned" by Vichy authorities, anything signed by De Gaulle at that time and place would have brought you straight to the gallows or a firing squad.

By contrast, General Weygand was the head of the Vichy government in French Northwest Africa. So, "letters of transit" signed by Weygand would indeed have had enormous cache for Vichy bureaucrats.

Aside from the captioning being off, I've actually had arguments with film buffs insisting that Lorre indeed says "de Gaulle." Even Roger Ebert claims it was "de Gaulle" for reasons unknown and unfathomable to me.

The only reason for this absurd development is that sometime decades ago someone misheard it, and not knowing the name of any other French general through all French history, decided "de Gaulle" was what Lorre was saying. This had to be an American. No French person, perhaps even no European of the time would be so ill-informed as to make this assumption.

Second rant: am I the only one who bristles when Ingrid Bergman refers to Dooley Wilson as that "boy" at the piano? And how Wilson is addressed by one and all as "Sam" while he has to preface every name with "Mr." or "Miss?" "Leave him alone, Miss Ilsa, you're bad luck to him."

I'm glad to see that contemporary viewers see the Claude Rains character as the sleaze he is. This evidently wasn't always the case, as it seems until fairly recently his exploitation of women fleeing the Nazis was often seen as somehow endearing, as in-"What a rascal!" But the racism inherent in how Sam is treated by others, and how others expect him to behave toward them, seems still often to go unremarked.

Just to be clear: I think "Casablanca" is a treasure and otherwise well-nigh perfect in every sense. Every time I see it I pick up on how incredibly detailed and nuanced it is. Just as an example, when "Karl" is sharing brandy with two German refugees about to leave for America, they have an exchange about the time. "What watch?" "Ten watch." "Such watch?" You have to know some German to know this would be an absolutely probable mistake for new English speakers to make. A common way for Germans to ask the time is, "Wieviel Urh ist es?" which could be literally translated as "How much clock is it?" or even "How much watch?" It's details like that that having me coming back again and again to view this masterpiece.

Someday I want to write an essay detailing all the subtle historical references that viewers these days often miss. But in the meantime, here's my rant.

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Also the Letters of Transit.. Permanut Apr 27 #1
I don't mind that. thucythucy Apr 27 #11
Just some more information, not a reply. LiberalLoner Apr 27 #2
Yes, and I think this gives the film an added poignancy. nt thucythucy Apr 27 #12
I always heard it as De Gaulle myself ... Auggie Apr 27 #3
Same peeves about it as you have! 50 Shades Of Blue Apr 27 #4
I always thought he said General De Gaulle too, but just now grumpyduck Apr 27 #5
I don't think Lorre made a mistake. thucythucy Apr 27 #13
I didn't realize that Casablanca was a documentary. I thought it was just a movie Deuxcents Apr 27 #6
Actually, as Hollywood movies of that era go, thucythucy Apr 27 #14
"Signed by General DeGaulle" Frasier Balzov Apr 27 #7
Nope, he's saying "Weygand," thucythucy Apr 27 #15
You're right. Frasier Balzov Apr 27 #18
Well, it's a hugely common mistake, thucythucy Apr 27 #19
Splendid piece. Thanks for sharing on my favorite film. I too feel the renewed wound when "Sam", Dooley Wilson's... brush Apr 27 #8
I don't know if I could categorize it as film noire, thucythucy Apr 27 #16
Again an excellent read. And I have to dispute your last sentence... brush Apr 28 #20
Thank you for all your kind words. thucythucy Apr 29 #21
"Is that the Chattanooga Choo Choo?" Frasier Balzov Apr 27 #9
I think the issue is different in Huckleberry Finn. thucythucy Apr 27 #17
It might as well have been made in 1939 with social attitudes like that reflected in the movie ZonkerHarris Apr 27 #10
Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Classic Films»Okay, a rant about Casabl...»Reply #0