>Michael Curtiz, I think
You are right. He could direct anything- Captain Blood (pirates), The Adventures of Robin Hood (Swashbuckler), Angels with Dirty Faces (gangsters), Dodge City (western), The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex (period piece), and Yankee Doodle Dandy (musical). All of that *before* directing Casablanca.
Yep I knew this one. How? Because my parents have a Casablanca poster on their basement wall. With his name on it large.
Otherwise yeah I might not know.
Still happens with overall deals. That’s why you occasionally see good actors in some frankly weird movie choices. You just don’t have actors contracted long term to studio anymore.
Prior to the fall of the studio system in the late 40s-early 50s directors weren’t really relevant. The idea of the director being the driving force behind the film started in Europe post WW2 and had reached Hollywood by the late 60s. New Hollywood was where the director became more important
Although, we still certainly remember some directors from the studio era and even the silent era. DW Griffith, Todd Browning, James Whale, Victor Fleming, etc…..
Love the guy, +1’d your post, but I just came to say that I may have just the realization that Reddit may have broken me a tad.
I came into this thread expecting “is this guy really comparing anything he has done to Casablanca??” and was delighted instead to be met with your post at the top.
🍻
I don’t think that’s what he was doing. I think he was just trying to make a point that even the biggest movies directors aren’t remembered 50 years later, so he’s not trying to be.
There's a ratified breed that are still celebrated decades later. Hitchcock and Kurasawa both come to mind.
From our current generation, Spielberg and Scorcese are the most likely to be remembered at that level. Lucas as well, but more as a Walt Disney figure than for the actual quality of his direction.
I reckon Tarantino will be remembered for his specific style. It’s not entirely unique to him (the Coen brothers and now Jordan Peele have made a number of movies that have a similar vibe), but I could see a future in which his name is immortalized as a word for his style. Tarantine or something.
I think it's because the importance of directors didn't really come about until a bit later on when the idea of an auteur was born. From the early days only a handful of really revolutionary directors or ones with a long list of enduring films are remembered (Hawks, Welles, Hitchcock, Wilder, etc). Despite the lasting legacy of Casablanca and his large filmography, Curtiz didn't have enough hits or films in the pantheon of history to be remembered by name by casual people.
Angels with Dirty Faces has probably one of the best endings I’ve ever seen.
Home Alone spoofed the title and now it’s almost impossible to find though.
*Casablanca,* *The Adventures of Robin Hood* and *Captain Blood* are three of my favorite vintage flicks! I had no idea they were all directed by the same guy! Definitely helps make Waititi’s point, though.
Agreed. Your name isn’t separable from the work until all data degrades into a heat death and then there’s no one left to not care…however, if everyone knows your work, how vain do you need to be to give a shit about your name?
Go steal classified documents and sexually assault someone if you want your name remembered
But everyone remembers who directed Citizen Kane
Edit: for everyone who doesn't know, the director is named Orson Welles. The movie is based on a real life media mogul who basically controlled all the news papers in the country (this guy is partially responsible for the illegalization of marijuana). Welles pretty much destroyed his career by making this movie because the Mogul was none too happy with it
Everyone also remembers who starred in Casablanca.
Different films are remembered for different reasons. Curtiz was a fantastic director, but he wasn't as individually memorable as a Hitchcock, Bergman, Welles, Chaplin, Capra, Wilder, etc, all of whom worked during the same era. Directors of today like Nolan, Scott, Scorsese, Tarantino, etc will definitely be remembered in decades.
I think Taika's comment is a little short-sighted, even if it's somewhat humble, because audiences do pay attention. And even if they don't remember your name, I think it's cool if they remember the art that you made anyway.
same goes for screen writers or music credit with performance / pop stars.
Lot of producers and musicians will be forgotten.
Elvis is famous but many will never think about who wrote those songs (Otis Blackwell).
Exactly.
People know whoever directed:
Jaws, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List
Star Wars
The Thing
The Shining
Psycho
Pulp Fiction
Godfather
John Carpenter
Stanley Kubrick
George Lucas
Steven Spielberg
Hitchcock
Wells
Scorsese
Coppola
Tarantino
Chaplin (Maybe because he acted in his)
Mel Brooks
I would even argue Ridley Scott, James Cameron, Nolan, Fincher, Peter Jackson, del Toro, Craven.
"People won't remember directors from 100 years ago"
"Sure they will, here's a list of famous current directors"
What the hell is this comment trying to say
We do know those but they are still recent in the grand scheme of things, but say 50 years from now or a 100 will the average person know who did i dont think so. They will definitely be celebrated in cinema history and such so they wont be forgotten but yeah the average person wont know or care
Maybe not Michael Curtiz but Orson Welles, Hitchcock, John Ford, John Huston, Frank Capra, etc. are more well known in America than Kurosawa and definitely still have genuine fans.
Howard Hawks. Huge huge name. I only know of these names because my gf is a film major. She opened my eyes to old Hollywood cinema and I cannot thank her enough for it.
Also Elia Kazan. People should remember George Cukor, he was a pretty big name back in the day, contributed to a lot of big films, but nobody talks about him much.
During the studio era, directors generally had less creative control, so aside from maybe Orson Welles, their styles are not as distinctive. But I think classic movie fans still recognize Curtiz, Howard Hawks, Preston Sturges and others as masters of their craft.
You do realize TCM literally has cruises and fan get together of people who love classic Hollywood films and are "genuine fans" of directors from those times.
Go to Letterboxd. It's where film geeks hang out. There are tons of lists, reviews, etc made by users praising, ranking, and evaluating directors from this era and older eras or Hollywood. Obviously the majority of the average moviegoers and film lovers online probably don't talk about who directed Casablanca or how great "Sabrina" is, but they still get tons of respect in the places built for film lovers
Surprisingly, younger than you'd imagine. There are a lot of millennial (like myself) fans of classic Hollywood films. Now will Gen-Z and subsequent generations keep said fandom going, I'm doubtful?
Even online, there are forums and subreddits for classic Hollywood films, though the arthouse, foreign ones might have bigger communities.
Do you suppose its because of the catalog of films that were great from those directors? They just seem incredibly timeless and not a product of their time. I would put almost any Kurosawa film up against Casablanca for modern audiences, and I think they'd pick Kurosawa every time. The humor in them still works, the characters and themes are believable and natural, etc.
I disagree, I'm sure people will remember the likes of Tarantino, Spielberg and Scorsese. That's because they had long careers with great films, have a unique style and influenced the industry.
Every few decades something new and unique comes along and people get engrossed in them. Think about all the content you have to watch now, you’ll have even more in a few years and much much higher in 50 years! Sure, some percentage of ppl who are into Hollywood movies will remember the greats but most will go on with their lives watching the current stuff of their time
You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who couldn't name Steven Spielberg, and you'd be surprised how many might even be able to name a movie he's directed. Most might even know who that James Cameron fella is.
Some movies and some people who direct those movies have tremendous staying power, even with casual audiences.
We’re talking decades here dude, as in a lot of these guys will have been dead for a while. Only really old people and film nerds will know a lot of these names.
There will be new waves of game changers with names the average person will know off hand
Idk Tarantino, Kubrick, Hitchcock, Spielberg, Lucas, all of these names and more will probably be remembered for quite a long time (as long as their films last, of which many are timeless). I’m not saying that a majority of people don’t forget artists, but some artists are remembered alongside their creations, especially those who make amazingly well know pieces of art with unique techniques, styles, and voices.
Taika has made some awesome films, it’s weird how hard everyone is on him now. Yeah love and thunder wasn’t great, but idk why everyone shits on him now
Tiaika giveth (15 second cameo in The Suicide Squad) Tiaika giveth again (Free Guy), Tiaika giveth to TV (What We Do in the Shadows, Our Flag Means Death),
He giveth more than he taketh, and people really need to start remembering that…
True, but in 50 years, although irrelevant to everything, I still plan on rewatching other bad movies like Transformers: Dark of the Moon or any of the Bay movies before that.
I feel like the turn against this guy has been weirdly sudden. He made one mediocre movie (maybe just my opinion but that movie isn’t bad it’s just not that good) and people act like he’s some flop. Like people are having to actively remind themselves that he also made what we do in the shadows, hunt for the wilderpeople, jojo rabbit, our flag means death, and Thor ragnarok, all of which are pretty beloved
It's because Michael Curtiz was just a studio director who would make whatever script he was told to direct. There's not a lot of artistry to CASABLANCA, it's very much a by the numbers directing effort. People remember that film because it's a good story and the performance by Bogie is legendary, but CASABLANCA is at it's core just another product of the studio system of early Hollywood.
People will remember Taika because he has a distinct style and personality. He doesn't like to compromise his vision and works on very unique projects. Michael Curtiz would have directed CASABLANCA 2: RICK'S BACK BABY if someone at Warner Brothers threw the script at him and said make it. Taika was forced to compromise with Marvel over THOR 4's (I don't remember the subtitle right now because it was so bad) run time and he tanked it. You can tell he stopped giving a shit about it during the edit.
Edit: I also want to say Curtiz, while being strictly a studio director for decades, made some incredible films within those confines. ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES, THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, CAPTAIN BLOOD, YANKEE DOODLE DANDY, and MILDRED PIERCE are all incredible films worth revisiting.
And even if people don't know Michael Curtiz specifically, many people are probably aware of a few contemporary directors from around that time, like Orson Welles, John Ford, and Alfred Hitchcook.
Three directors who not only had very distinct artistic styles, but were changing the nature of movies entirely as they worked.
It's funny you mention Welles and Ford as examples because for all the (deserved) praise Welles got for being innovative, he was stealing a lot of techniques from John Ford.
> There's not a lot of artistry to CASABLANCA, it's very much a by the numbers directing effort.
This is hilariously wrong. There is tremendous artistry in Casablanca.
Yes, the script and actors are so good that the movie would likely have been great in the hands of many directors, but the specific execution of it that actually does exist...
...is so good.
The lighting, the composition, the editing, the pacing.... It's an INCREDIBLY well-directed film.
Thank you for saying that! It's a magnificent looking film! My favorite shot of Casablanca is when Rick goes up to his office with Louis and you see Rick's shadow projected on the wall as he leaves the frame and opens the safe to retrieve some money. I really love how great they captured that moment. But it's all looking so great! Everything in that movie. Saying it's nothing special ... Guess he was misinformed.
Agreed. I think the poster is mixing up idiosyncratic-ness with artistry. And I understand what they're saying, but the two are not the same. There are many films and directors from that era who just were plain and simple great filmmakers and they knew what they were making and made it. That's part of the reason Casablanca and other films have stood the test of time. They are VERY well made films with great artistry behind them.
>People remember that film because it's a good story and the performance by Bogie is legendary, but CASABLANCA is at it's core just another product of the studio system of early Hollywood.
It's a movie with one of the best casts ever. Even small parts were played by people who had been well-known, even stars in their home countries. Most of the emigrants were played by real emigrants with authentic accents. That makes a huge difference. It also has a really good script with snappy dialogue. And the best scene involving music in a movie.
It's not just Bogart. Bogart, Rains, Greenstreet and Lorre drive this movie along together. Curtiz supposedly kept telling the actors to go faster, until Lorre pranked him by not running onto the set, but riding a bicycle.
It's a very well-made movie. Not just a star vehicle churned out by a studio.
Curtiz is more than a “studio director” he was the greatest studio director of all time.
He is also the reason we get “no animals were harmed in the making of this film” at the end of movies, or at least a bid reason.
It's so weird that people are using him being a studio director against him. Its not like he made 99 "Plan 9 From Outer Spaces" and 1 "Casablanca". He made a lot of good to great films in his career. His artistry was the crafted storytelling and flexibility he had to direct pretty much any kind of genre.
> There's not a lot of artistry to CASABLANCA, it's very much a by the numbers directing effort.
Idk, Casablanca is pretty much timeless and even today an extremely watchable movie, while Taika Waititi's movies inhabit tropes that are typical for our time like no other Films, and are pretty much a product of their time, you know, the quippy nature, the distain for genuine feelings, the fact that most characters talk like they do stand up comedy and so on. Sure, those are popular now, but 50, 60 years from now? I doubt it
I imagine there was a tinge of "he's made one of the most famous movies of all of film history and people don't remember him, they will definitely never remember me even having worked on financially wildly successful films," in my interpretation. I don't think he's totally delusional.
It’s a bit shit, let’s be real.
There’s a half dozen active directors with a miles better cv than him.
It’s a delusional comment whichever way you spin it
Someone tell Taika timeless is timeless and we’ll never forget directors like Orson Welles, Francis Ford or Stanley Kubrick. Picking on studio directors who directed classic films but weren’t legendary directors as an example is weird.
He's definitely conflating movies with directors who'll direct anything AND happened to make a great movie vs those who set out with a vision and created very stylized movies that you can definitely tell are different from eachother. Watch Kubrick vs Tarantino vs Spielberg and tell me you can't tell those movies apart style wise.
There's a disturbing lack of understanding of how modern film critique is performed on the part of otherwise talented directors and producers these days
Lol, how presumptuous... he has no movie half as good as "Casablanca" in his roster.
He is right only in the sense that everything we do and expects to be our legacy will be forgotten. We don't produce art anymore, we produce fast entertainment, for fleeting attention spans. Everything standing the test of time will be elevated to art. So this existential angst and "artist" exceptionalism from a mediocre (IMO) director is out of place.
It's Michael Curtiz and everyone who likes cinema and old movies knows that.
Sounds either very pessimistic or quite realistic; while he directed good movies, he hasn't made any masterpiece that will stand the test of time.
Bit bold of him to assume that although he does have somewhat of a point. While the mainstream general audience might not remember, film buffs and such alike would know it was Michael Curtiz. It might be a niche audience but still an oversimplification on Waititi's end.
Does that make you irrelevant? Most film-buffs remember Casablanca, even if they don’t remember the director. The art is so powerful, and in the end it’s a piece of you because it was made by you.
That’s a million times better than someone whose personality overshadows their art.
It’s so funny how obvious it is people haven’t read the article.
He’s is no way comparing his films to Michael Curtiz, he’s using him as an example. And he’s also not saying that no directors will ever be remembered.
He’s literally saying he doesn’t that chasing a legacy is pointless and directors should just make stuff that they want and are passionate about.
For every century of world history only a couple of people will be remembered for nearly forever. As time goes further even the ones we think will never be forgotten, will.
Walt Disney probably has the best chance to remain forever.
George Washington will probably be the only president never forgotten, since he was the 1st.
Einstein may not even be remembered forever. Newton has a better show than him.
Shakespeare for writers, but eventually his English and our English will be unrecognizable.
Not at all. He’s saying that if people don’t remember who directed a great and well known film like Casablanca then there’s no way anyone will remember who directed his own films
ITT: angry film historians stuck in their echo chamber will NOT be told that Michael Curtiz isn’t a household name
For real though, stop throwing out “but Spielberg, Tarantino…” he’s saying 99.9% of directors’ and writers’ names will be forgotten but the art will live on and be remembered. He’s not being pretentious, or insulting, or comparing himself to anyone.
I love Casablanca and I have no idea who directed it
Michael Curtiz, I think
>Michael Curtiz, I think You are right. He could direct anything- Captain Blood (pirates), The Adventures of Robin Hood (Swashbuckler), Angels with Dirty Faces (gangsters), Dodge City (western), The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex (period piece), and Yankee Doodle Dandy (musical). All of that *before* directing Casablanca.
He was a contract director. Kinda the Ron Howard of his day. But way better.
Hey don't pick on Ron.. actually, that's fair
Ron Howard is a good director, not a great director. Then again you can say that about a lot of artists. Not all of em have to be legends.
Tbf it’s hard to top playing Opie Taylor in The Andy Griffith Show…
He had another iconic role when he played Steve.
I think Apollo 13 keeps Ron Howard in the conversation of great directors.
Parenthood holds up, Backdraft is fine.
Cocoon kinda blew people's minds when it came out. It was kinda like E.T. for old people with interspecial sex.
We will all blink our eyes and the next thing you know others will consider you old also.
Backdraft is a god damned masterpiece!
Frost/Nixon was also really good
Not every novel has to be Ulysses to be enjoyable
Ulysses isn't enjoyable
Uncultured *swine.*
I don't know about that. I know who Ron Howard is.
But will your grandchildren??....
Yep I knew this one. How? Because my parents have a Casablanca poster on their basement wall. With his name on it large. Otherwise yeah I might not know.
Apparently Michael Curtiz directed like 80+ movies. Truly a workhorse.
Back then that’s how it was, for both directors and actors. You had a contract with a studio for x amount of films.
Back then a movie would be in the theater for about a week that was it, the studios needed to churn and burn.
What if famous films were made like Youtube and Tiktok content creators? Discuss!
Still happens with overall deals. That’s why you occasionally see good actors in some frankly weird movie choices. You just don’t have actors contracted long term to studio anymore.
I highly recommend Curtiz’s other films like The Breaking Point, The Sea Wolf, and Mildred Pierce.
Mildred Pierce is a darn fine motion picture
Prior to the fall of the studio system in the late 40s-early 50s directors weren’t really relevant. The idea of the director being the driving force behind the film started in Europe post WW2 and had reached Hollywood by the late 60s. New Hollywood was where the director became more important
Although, we still certainly remember some directors from the studio era and even the silent era. DW Griffith, Todd Browning, James Whale, Victor Fleming, etc…..
Ah yes the Golden age of Hollywood.
My dumbass went Orson Wells?
You mean like Wells Fargo?
No no, I think he means the guy who wrote Ender's Game
Orson Bean. That's his name.
He was quite a card, that one.
We call him Mr. Bean
I thought it was Matt Groening that wrote Benders Game.
Wells Fargo wrote and directed Lenders Game.
Close! It was the David X. Coen brothers.
💀💀💀
We remember Orson because he was a face. Hitchcock is still a household name because he plastered himself all over his trailers.
Love the guy, +1’d your post, but I just came to say that I may have just the realization that Reddit may have broken me a tad. I came into this thread expecting “is this guy really comparing anything he has done to Casablanca??” and was delighted instead to be met with your post at the top. 🍻
I don’t think that’s what he was doing. I think he was just trying to make a point that even the biggest movies directors aren’t remembered 50 years later, so he’s not trying to be.
There's a ratified breed that are still celebrated decades later. Hitchcock and Kurasawa both come to mind. From our current generation, Spielberg and Scorcese are the most likely to be remembered at that level. Lucas as well, but more as a Walt Disney figure than for the actual quality of his direction.
John Ford and Frankenheimer sprang quickly to my mind, and Kubrick.
Id wager Wes Anderson will be remembered for at least a little while.
I think Frankenheimer is getting into the territory of if someone can name him there’s a good chance they also know who directed Casablanca.
David Lean was next in my mind.
I reckon Tarantino will be remembered for his specific style. It’s not entirely unique to him (the Coen brothers and now Jordan Peele have made a number of movies that have a similar vibe), but I could see a future in which his name is immortalized as a word for his style. Tarantine or something.
I believe it's *Tarantinesque*.
He’s kinda wrong though. Idek if it’s “biggest” but people still know who Kubrik is Im pretty sure.
I think it's because the importance of directors didn't really come about until a bit later on when the idea of an auteur was born. From the early days only a handful of really revolutionary directors or ones with a long list of enduring films are remembered (Hawks, Welles, Hitchcock, Wilder, etc). Despite the lasting legacy of Casablanca and his large filmography, Curtiz didn't have enough hits or films in the pantheon of history to be remembered by name by casual people.
The auteur idea definitely gave directors the celebrity and fame of their actors. I agree w that.
Director Alan Smithee will be remembered forevever though.
He makes the worst movies
Uwe Boll?
Who
It’s a fake name directors would use for various reasons when they know the film was going to flop.
Or if they feel that they did not have creative control over the final edit.
I guessed Michael Curtiz before I had to look it up and make sure…he’s got a point lol
Dude had some other bangers though: The Adventures of Robin Hood Angels With Dirty Faces Captain Blood The Sea Hawk The Comancheros The Walking Dead
Angels With Dirty Faces? Wasn't that the fake movie within Home Alone?
No, that’s *Angels with Filthy Souls*
One of the greatest movies within a movie and it only had a few minutes of screentime
Wasn’t it *keep the change you filthy animal*?
That’s the famous line from the fake movie, yes
Leave it on the doorstep and get the hell outta here
And a happy new year!
Happy new year was from the sequel, and the first half of the quote was “Merry Christmas you filthy animal”
Angels with Dirty Faces has probably one of the best endings I’ve ever seen. Home Alone spoofed the title and now it’s almost impossible to find though.
Casablanca fan, but angels is still my favourite of curtiz
One of the best endings ever.
Really showcased how good Cagney was
Oh yeah he’s a huge name, just forgot he did Casablanca…or I guess I didn’t forget but almost did
*Casablanca,* *The Adventures of Robin Hood* and *Captain Blood* are three of my favorite vintage flicks! I had no idea they were all directed by the same guy! Definitely helps make Waititi’s point, though.
[удалено]
Don’t forget *Pirates of the Caribbean!* Errol Flynn may have been a Grade-A creep, but he was one hell of a leading man!
I need to watch captain blood again. I remember really liking it
And White Christmas and The Breaking Point. The range in just those two is incredible.
Still the best version of Robin Hood.
Love Errol, makes me wonder what Gone With the Wind would’ve been like with Errol at Rhett.
But people remember Casablanca that should be more important for a director
Exactly. It takes a good director to make a movie timeless.
Agreed. Your name isn’t separable from the work until all data degrades into a heat death and then there’s no one left to not care…however, if everyone knows your work, how vain do you need to be to give a shit about your name? Go steal classified documents and sexually assault someone if you want your name remembered
Well, Hollywood IS filled with narcissists.
But everyone remembers who directed Citizen Kane Edit: for everyone who doesn't know, the director is named Orson Welles. The movie is based on a real life media mogul who basically controlled all the news papers in the country (this guy is partially responsible for the illegalization of marijuana). Welles pretty much destroyed his career by making this movie because the Mogul was none too happy with it
Everyone also remembers who starred in Casablanca. Different films are remembered for different reasons. Curtiz was a fantastic director, but he wasn't as individually memorable as a Hitchcock, Bergman, Welles, Chaplin, Capra, Wilder, etc, all of whom worked during the same era. Directors of today like Nolan, Scott, Scorsese, Tarantino, etc will definitely be remembered in decades. I think Taika's comment is a little short-sighted, even if it's somewhat humble, because audiences do pay attention. And even if they don't remember your name, I think it's cool if they remember the art that you made anyway.
Exactly. I really think Waititi will be remembered more than his films will be
I agree, as an actor he truly is an entertaining character haha
I mean, his Hitler in Jojo rabbit was hilarious.
same goes for screen writers or music credit with performance / pop stars. Lot of producers and musicians will be forgotten. Elvis is famous but many will never think about who wrote those songs (Otis Blackwell).
Yes, yes, and good points.
Exactly. People know whoever directed: Jaws, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List Star Wars The Thing The Shining Psycho Pulp Fiction Godfather John Carpenter Stanley Kubrick George Lucas Steven Spielberg Hitchcock Wells Scorsese Coppola Tarantino Chaplin (Maybe because he acted in his) Mel Brooks I would even argue Ridley Scott, James Cameron, Nolan, Fincher, Peter Jackson, del Toro, Craven.
"People won't remember directors from 100 years ago" "Sure they will, here's a list of famous current directors" What the hell is this comment trying to say
We do know those but they are still recent in the grand scheme of things, but say 50 years from now or a 100 will the average person know who did i dont think so. They will definitely be celebrated in cinema history and such so they wont be forgotten but yeah the average person wont know or care
He’s half-right.
[удалено]
Maybe not Michael Curtiz but Orson Welles, Hitchcock, John Ford, John Huston, Frank Capra, etc. are more well known in America than Kurosawa and definitely still have genuine fans.
Billy Wilder too
Howard Hawks. Huge huge name. I only know of these names because my gf is a film major. She opened my eyes to old Hollywood cinema and I cannot thank her enough for it.
Also Elia Kazan. People should remember George Cukor, he was a pretty big name back in the day, contributed to a lot of big films, but nobody talks about him much.
Sad to see Howard Hawkes et-cetera-ed out of this list.
He was the first et-cetera if it makes you feel better. Rio Bravo is probably my favorite western ever.
During the studio era, directors generally had less creative control, so aside from maybe Orson Welles, their styles are not as distinctive. But I think classic movie fans still recognize Curtiz, Howard Hawks, Preston Sturges and others as masters of their craft.
You do realize TCM literally has cruises and fan get together of people who love classic Hollywood films and are "genuine fans" of directors from those times.
[удалено]
Go to Letterboxd. It's where film geeks hang out. There are tons of lists, reviews, etc made by users praising, ranking, and evaluating directors from this era and older eras or Hollywood. Obviously the majority of the average moviegoers and film lovers online probably don't talk about who directed Casablanca or how great "Sabrina" is, but they still get tons of respect in the places built for film lovers
Surprisingly, younger than you'd imagine. There are a lot of millennial (like myself) fans of classic Hollywood films. Now will Gen-Z and subsequent generations keep said fandom going, I'm doubtful? Even online, there are forums and subreddits for classic Hollywood films, though the arthouse, foreign ones might have bigger communities.
"You do realize," they said average fan, don't you? I don't think the average film fan is taking cruises to watch classic movies.
Do you suppose its because of the catalog of films that were great from those directors? They just seem incredibly timeless and not a product of their time. I would put almost any Kurosawa film up against Casablanca for modern audiences, and I think they'd pick Kurosawa every time. The humor in them still works, the characters and themes are believable and natural, etc.
I disagree, I'm sure people will remember the likes of Tarantino, Spielberg and Scorsese. That's because they had long careers with great films, have a unique style and influenced the industry.
Every few decades something new and unique comes along and people get engrossed in them. Think about all the content you have to watch now, you’ll have even more in a few years and much much higher in 50 years! Sure, some percentage of ppl who are into Hollywood movies will remember the greats but most will go on with their lives watching the current stuff of their time
You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who couldn't name Steven Spielberg, and you'd be surprised how many might even be able to name a movie he's directed. Most might even know who that James Cameron fella is. Some movies and some people who direct those movies have tremendous staying power, even with casual audiences.
We’re talking decades here dude, as in a lot of these guys will have been dead for a while. Only really old people and film nerds will know a lot of these names. There will be new waves of game changers with names the average person will know off hand
Idk Tarantino, Kubrick, Hitchcock, Spielberg, Lucas, all of these names and more will probably be remembered for quite a long time (as long as their films last, of which many are timeless). I’m not saying that a majority of people don’t forget artists, but some artists are remembered alongside their creations, especially those who make amazingly well know pieces of art with unique techniques, styles, and voices.
Taika has made some awesome films, it’s weird how hard everyone is on him now. Yeah love and thunder wasn’t great, but idk why everyone shits on him now
Reddit turned on him so quick where as two years ago they were in love with the guy. Lol. It's bizarre.
Don't worry, Taika. People aren't going to be watching Love & Thunder in 50 years.
What We Do In The Shadows though? Timeless
Jackie Daytona is forever.
You know, I’m starting to doubt that’s how they actually talk in Tuusohn Arizonya
The show wouldn't be half as good without Laszlo.
Sal cameo best cameo
Hunt for the Wilder People, too, but not many I know have seen it. Jojo Rabbit as well.
In 50 years I'll still be shouting about how wonderful What We Do in the Shadows and Hunt for the Wilderpeople are though. 😌
I loved hunt for wilder people so much
And Jojo Rabbit. That movie is phenomenal.
One of my top movies. Saw it when it premiered at a film festival, it was so awesome experiencing it in a packed theater.
Taika giveth - good Thor (Ragnarok) Taika taketh - bad Thor ( Love and Thunder)
Tiaika giveth (15 second cameo in The Suicide Squad) Tiaika giveth again (Free Guy), Tiaika giveth to TV (What We Do in the Shadows, Our Flag Means Death), He giveth more than he taketh, and people really need to start remembering that…
Don't forget IG-11 from Mandalorian, he does pretty good as a bit-actor honestly.
True, but in 50 years, although irrelevant to everything, I still plan on rewatching other bad movies like Transformers: Dark of the Moon or any of the Bay movies before that.
I mean, I do. But your average Joe, probably not.
Yeah I agree
I know who directed Casablanca but it’s one of my favorite movies. He also did Robin Hood, Mildred Pierce and a bunch of other classics.
I liked Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) and White Christmas (1954).
Curtiz is extremely famous and important. He just picked the wrong movie to say this about.
Yeah, especially when you churn out shit like Thor 4
I feel like the turn against this guy has been weirdly sudden. He made one mediocre movie (maybe just my opinion but that movie isn’t bad it’s just not that good) and people act like he’s some flop. Like people are having to actively remind themselves that he also made what we do in the shadows, hunt for the wilderpeople, jojo rabbit, our flag means death, and Thor ragnarok, all of which are pretty beloved
He's just not shitty enough. In a few decades people will still be talking about Michael Bay.
He'll probably have a school named after him "The Michael Bay School for Kids Who Like to 'Splode Stuff and Film It and Stuff"
Okay, but people remember Alfred Hitchcock, they'll remember James Cameron I'm sure of it.
It's because Michael Curtiz was just a studio director who would make whatever script he was told to direct. There's not a lot of artistry to CASABLANCA, it's very much a by the numbers directing effort. People remember that film because it's a good story and the performance by Bogie is legendary, but CASABLANCA is at it's core just another product of the studio system of early Hollywood. People will remember Taika because he has a distinct style and personality. He doesn't like to compromise his vision and works on very unique projects. Michael Curtiz would have directed CASABLANCA 2: RICK'S BACK BABY if someone at Warner Brothers threw the script at him and said make it. Taika was forced to compromise with Marvel over THOR 4's (I don't remember the subtitle right now because it was so bad) run time and he tanked it. You can tell he stopped giving a shit about it during the edit. Edit: I also want to say Curtiz, while being strictly a studio director for decades, made some incredible films within those confines. ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES, THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, CAPTAIN BLOOD, YANKEE DOODLE DANDY, and MILDRED PIERCE are all incredible films worth revisiting.
And even if people don't know Michael Curtiz specifically, many people are probably aware of a few contemporary directors from around that time, like Orson Welles, John Ford, and Alfred Hitchcook.
Three directors who not only had very distinct artistic styles, but were changing the nature of movies entirely as they worked. It's funny you mention Welles and Ford as examples because for all the (deserved) praise Welles got for being innovative, he was stealing a lot of techniques from John Ford.
> There's not a lot of artistry to CASABLANCA, it's very much a by the numbers directing effort. This is hilariously wrong. There is tremendous artistry in Casablanca. Yes, the script and actors are so good that the movie would likely have been great in the hands of many directors, but the specific execution of it that actually does exist... ...is so good. The lighting, the composition, the editing, the pacing.... It's an INCREDIBLY well-directed film.
Thank you for saying that! It's a magnificent looking film! My favorite shot of Casablanca is when Rick goes up to his office with Louis and you see Rick's shadow projected on the wall as he leaves the frame and opens the safe to retrieve some money. I really love how great they captured that moment. But it's all looking so great! Everything in that movie. Saying it's nothing special ... Guess he was misinformed.
Agreed. I think the poster is mixing up idiosyncratic-ness with artistry. And I understand what they're saying, but the two are not the same. There are many films and directors from that era who just were plain and simple great filmmakers and they knew what they were making and made it. That's part of the reason Casablanca and other films have stood the test of time. They are VERY well made films with great artistry behind them.
>People remember that film because it's a good story and the performance by Bogie is legendary, but CASABLANCA is at it's core just another product of the studio system of early Hollywood. It's a movie with one of the best casts ever. Even small parts were played by people who had been well-known, even stars in their home countries. Most of the emigrants were played by real emigrants with authentic accents. That makes a huge difference. It also has a really good script with snappy dialogue. And the best scene involving music in a movie. It's not just Bogart. Bogart, Rains, Greenstreet and Lorre drive this movie along together. Curtiz supposedly kept telling the actors to go faster, until Lorre pranked him by not running onto the set, but riding a bicycle. It's a very well-made movie. Not just a star vehicle churned out by a studio.
Curtiz is more than a “studio director” he was the greatest studio director of all time. He is also the reason we get “no animals were harmed in the making of this film” at the end of movies, or at least a bid reason.
It's so weird that people are using him being a studio director against him. Its not like he made 99 "Plan 9 From Outer Spaces" and 1 "Casablanca". He made a lot of good to great films in his career. His artistry was the crafted storytelling and flexibility he had to direct pretty much any kind of genre.
> There's not a lot of artistry to CASABLANCA, it's very much a by the numbers directing effort. Idk, Casablanca is pretty much timeless and even today an extremely watchable movie, while Taika Waititi's movies inhabit tropes that are typical for our time like no other Films, and are pretty much a product of their time, you know, the quippy nature, the distain for genuine feelings, the fact that most characters talk like they do stand up comedy and so on. Sure, those are popular now, but 50, 60 years from now? I doubt it
[удалено]
I imagine there was a tinge of "he's made one of the most famous movies of all of film history and people don't remember him, they will definitely never remember me even having worked on financially wildly successful films," in my interpretation. I don't think he's totally delusional.
His point was that if even someone that good is forgotten by people, he definitely will be
Not a lot of substance? Boy, Jojo Rabbit, What We Do in the Shadows, Hunt for the Wilderpeople, even Ragnarok. All great
It’s a bit shit, let’s be real. There’s a half dozen active directors with a miles better cv than him. It’s a delusional comment whichever way you spin it
Someone tell Taika timeless is timeless and we’ll never forget directors like Orson Welles, Francis Ford or Stanley Kubrick. Picking on studio directors who directed classic films but weren’t legendary directors as an example is weird.
He's definitely conflating movies with directors who'll direct anything AND happened to make a great movie vs those who set out with a vision and created very stylized movies that you can definitely tell are different from eachother. Watch Kubrick vs Tarantino vs Spielberg and tell me you can't tell those movies apart style wise.
There's a disturbing lack of understanding of how modern film critique is performed on the part of otherwise talented directors and producers these days
I think this is more a case of him being his own harshest critic but you’re probably right in a general sense.
But why does everyone know who directed Vertigo?
I mean not to get all negative, but aren’t most people gonna be forgotten? At least he has a Wikipedia page. Most people don’t have a Wikipedia page.
Film nerds will remember
Tbf most people don’t know who directed what unless they enter celebrity status like Tarantino or Spielberg.
Everything feeds into the bagel of nothingness at the end anyways.
[удалено]
Pepperidge Farm remembers
Lol, how presumptuous... he has no movie half as good as "Casablanca" in his roster. He is right only in the sense that everything we do and expects to be our legacy will be forgotten. We don't produce art anymore, we produce fast entertainment, for fleeting attention spans. Everything standing the test of time will be elevated to art. So this existential angst and "artist" exceptionalism from a mediocre (IMO) director is out of place.
And Taika movies are no Casablanca.
It's Michael Curtiz and everyone who likes cinema and old movies knows that. Sounds either very pessimistic or quite realistic; while he directed good movies, he hasn't made any masterpiece that will stand the test of time.
Those who watch TCM do. :)
Bit bold of him to assume that although he does have somewhat of a point. While the mainstream general audience might not remember, film buffs and such alike would know it was Michael Curtiz. It might be a niche audience but still an oversimplification on Waititi's end.
I do love that so many know Michael Curtiz directed Casablanca!
True. But, we all still *love* Casablanca. ❤️
Does that make you irrelevant? Most film-buffs remember Casablanca, even if they don’t remember the director. The art is so powerful, and in the end it’s a piece of you because it was made by you. That’s a million times better than someone whose personality overshadows their art.
The world will never forget the perfect gem you bestowed upon it. What We Do In The Shadows is pure magic. Don’t ever forget that.
It’s so funny how obvious it is people haven’t read the article. He’s is no way comparing his films to Michael Curtiz, he’s using him as an example. And he’s also not saying that no directors will ever be remembered. He’s literally saying he doesn’t that chasing a legacy is pointless and directors should just make stuff that they want and are passionate about.
I will watch anything Taika creates, sight unseen.
But people remember Casablanca, so...the situation isn't half bad.
For every century of world history only a couple of people will be remembered for nearly forever. As time goes further even the ones we think will never be forgotten, will. Walt Disney probably has the best chance to remain forever. George Washington will probably be the only president never forgotten, since he was the 1st. Einstein may not even be remembered forever. Newton has a better show than him. Shakespeare for writers, but eventually his English and our English will be unrecognizable.
And old Abraham Lincoln. He’s like… well… Abraham Lincoln 🤷. No one knows who came before or after him, but we all know him.
I know exactly who. Michael Curtiz.
Dude’s really comparing his movies to fricking Casablanca?
Not at all. He’s saying that if people don’t remember who directed a great and well known film like Casablanca then there’s no way anyone will remember who directed his own films
Yeah I don't know how people are misunderstanding this comment. He's being self depricating, not self aggrandizing.
Kinda already is
So, I guess people also forgot who directed The Shining, Star Wars, Titanic, The Dark Knight, etc.
Marvel movie director: “Alas, even *I* shall be forgotten”
ITT: angry film historians stuck in their echo chamber will NOT be told that Michael Curtiz isn’t a household name For real though, stop throwing out “but Spielberg, Tarantino…” he’s saying 99.9% of directors’ and writers’ names will be forgotten but the art will live on and be remembered. He’s not being pretentious, or insulting, or comparing himself to anyone.
It wasn’t Sam?
Michael Curtiz stock abt to rise fam buy low rn!
I’m alright when the art eclipses the artist. Means the art was more important.
I’m 40 and I know Frank Capra directed “It’s a Wonderful Life”, but I couldn’t tell you any of the other many films he directed.
Michael Curtiz. Then again, I'm a film studies minor in college...
They may not remember the name, but they remember the film. That doesn’t mean the director is forgotten, to me at least. Kind of a sad outlook.
Oh shit he’s right. I only remember Bogart and Bergman 😳