Editing Casablanca (film) (section)

=== Popularity ===
In the decades since its release, the film has grown in reputation. Murray Burnett called it "true yesterday, true today, true tomorrow".<ref>Interviewed in [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0280526/ ''Casablanca 50th Anniversary Special: You Must Remember This''] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051221002133/http://imdb.com/title/tt0280526/ |date=December 21, 2005 }} (Turner: 1992)</ref> By 1955, the film had brought in $6.8 million, making it the third-most-successful of Warners' wartime movies, behind ''[[Shine On, Harvest Moon (1944 film)|Shine On, Harvest Moon]]'' and ''[[This Is the Army]]''.<ref>{{Harvnb|Harmetz|1992|p=283}}</ref> On April 21, 1957, the [[Brattle Theater]] of Cambridge, Massachusetts, showed the film as part of a season of old movies. It proved so popular that a tradition began in which ''Casablanca'' would be screened during the week of final exams at [[Harvard University]]. [[Todd Gitlin]], a professor of sociology who had attended one of these screenings, has said that the experience was "the acting out of my own personal rite of passage".<ref>{{Harvnb|Harmetz|1992|p=343}}</ref> The tradition helped the film remain popular while other films that had been famous in the 1940s have faded from popular memory. By 1977, ''Casablanca'' had become the most frequently broadcast film on American television.<ref>{{Harvnb|Harmetz|1992|p=346}}</ref>

Ingrid Bergman's portrayal of Ilsa Lund in ''Casablanca'' became one of her best-known roles.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Chandler |first=Charlotte |url=https://archive.org/details/ingridingridberg00chan/page/19 |title=Ingrid: Ingrid Bergman, A Personal Biography |publisher=Simon & Schuster |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-7432-9421-8 |location=New York |pages=[https://archive.org/details/ingridingridberg00chan/page/19 19, 21, 294]}}</ref> In later years she said, "I feel about ''Casablanca'' that it has a life of its own. There is something mystical about it. It seems to have filled a need, a need that was there before the film, a need that the film filled."<ref>{{harvnb|Chandler|2007|page=[https://archive.org/details/ingridingridberg00chan/page/88/mode/2up 88]}}</ref>

On the film's 50th anniversary, the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'' called ''Casablanca''{{-'}}s great strength "the purity of its Golden Age Hollywoodness [and] the enduring craftsmanship of its resonantly hokey dialogue". Bob Strauss wrote in the newspaper that the film achieved a "near-perfect entertainment balance" of comedy, romance, and suspense.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Strauss |first=Bob |date=April 10, 1992 |title=Still the best: ''Casablanca'' loses no luster over time |work=[[Los Angeles Times]]}}</ref>

Roger Ebert wrote of ''Casablanca'' in 1992, "There are greater movies. More profound movies. Movies of greater artistic vision or artistic originality or political significance. ... But [it is] one of the movies we treasure the most ... This is a movie that has transcended the ordinary categories."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ebert |first=Roger |date=April 5, 1992 |title=As time goes by, it's the still the same old glorious 'Casablanca' |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/as-time-goes-by-its-the-still-the-same-old-glorious-casablanca |access-date=April 10, 2022 |website=Roger Ebert.com}}</ref> In his opinion, the film is popular because "the people in it are all so good" and it is "a wonderful gem".<ref name="Ebertcommentary" /> Ebert said that he had never heard of a negative review of the film, even though individual elements can be criticized, citing unrealistic [[special effect]]s and the stiff character of Laszlo as portrayed by Paul Henreid.<ref name="Ebertcommentaryquote" />

Critic and film historian [[Leonard Maltin]] considers ''Casablanca'' "the best Hollywood movie of all time".<ref>{{Cite news |date=March 9, 2012 |title='Casablanca' to be shown on the big screen in Oklahoma City |url=https://oklahoman.com/article/3655669/casablanca-to-be-shown-on-the-big-screen-in-oklahoma-city |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150922053835/http://newsok.com/casablanca-to-be-shown-on-the-big-screen-in-oklahoma-city/article/3655669 |archive-date=September 22, 2015 |access-date=January 10, 2015 |work=NewsOK}}</ref>

According to [[Rudy Behlmer]], the character of Rick is "not a hero&nbsp;... not a bad guy" because he does what is necessary to appease the authorities and "sticks his neck out for nobody". Behlmer feels that the other characters are "not cut and dried" and come into their goodness over the course of the film. Renault begins as a collaborator with the Nazis who extorts sexual favors from refugees and has Ugarte killed. Even Ilsa, the least active of the main characters, is "caught in the emotional struggle" over which man she really loves. By the end, however, "everybody is sacrificing".<ref name="Ebertcommentaryquote" /> Behlmer also emphasized the variety in the picture. "It's a blend of drama, melodrama, comedy [and] intrigue."<ref name="Ebertcommentaryquote" />

Scott Tobias, writing for ''The Guardian'' on the film's 80th anniversary, calls it "the jewel of Hollywood's Golden Age", and the best example of the system of film-making working: due not to an artistic genius but a combination of talented writing, set design, music, casting, supporting characters, and production.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Tobias |first=Scott |date=2022-11-26 |title=Casablanca at 80: a golden age classic that remains impossible to resist |url=https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/nov/26/casablanca-80-humphrey-bogart-ingrid-bergman |access-date=2023-12-20 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

A few reviewers have expressed reservations. To [[Pauline Kael]], "It's far from a great film, but it has a special appealingly schlocky romanticism&nbsp;..."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kael |first=Pauline |title=Casablanca |url=http://www.geocities.com/paulinekaelreviews/c2.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20091026041810/http://www.geocities.com/paulinekaelreviews/c2.html |archive-date=October 26, 2009 |access-date=January 5, 2009 |publisher=geocities.com}}</ref> [[Umberto Eco]] wrote that "by any strict critical standards&nbsp;... ''Casablanca'' is a very mediocre film". He viewed the changes that the characters manifest as inconsistent rather than complex. "It is a comic strip, a hotchpotch, low on psychological credibility, and with little continuity in its dramatic effects." However, he added that because of the presence of multiple archetypes that allow "the power of Narrative in its natural state without Art intervening to discipline it", it is a film reaching "Homeric depths" as a "phenomenon worthy of awe".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Eco |first=Umberto |author-link=Umberto Eco |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DRd1DZ-5MX0C&pg=PA35 |chapter=''Casablanca'', or the Clichés are Having a Ball |title=On Signs |publisher=JHU Press |year=1985 |isbn=978-0-8018-3007-5 |editor-last=Blonsky |editor-first=Marshal |pages=35–38 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160502203716/https://books.google.com/books?id=DRd1DZ-5MX0C&pg=PA35 |archive-date=May 2, 2016 |url-status=live}}</ref>

{{Rotten Tomatoes prose|99|9.5|136|access-date=14 May 2024}} The website's consensus reads, "An undisputed masterpiece and perhaps Hollywood's quintessential statement on love and romance, Casablanca has only improved with age, boasting career-defining performances from Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman."<ref>{{Cite Rotten Tomatoes |id=1003707-casablanca |title=Casablanca |type=m |access-date={{RT data|access-date}}}}{{RT data|edit}}</ref>
On [[Metacritic]], the film has a perfect score of 100 out of 100, based on 18 critics, indicating "universal acclaim".<ref>{{cite Metacritic|id=casablanca |title=Casablanca |type=m |access-date=May 7, 2020}}</ref> It is one of the few films in the site's history to achieve a perfect aggregate score.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Best Movies of All Time |url=https://www.metacritic.com/browse/movies/score/metascore/all/filtered?sort=desc |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190809210855/https://www.metacritic.com/browse/movies/score/metascore/all/filtered?sort=desc |archive-date=August 9, 2019 |access-date=May 2, 2022 |website=[[Metacritic]] |publisher=[[Red Ventures]]}}</ref>

In the November/December 1982 issue of ''[[Film Comment]]'', Chuck Ross wrote that he retyped the ''Casablanca'' screenplay, reverting the title to ''Everybody Comes to Rick's'' and changing the name of Sam the piano player to Dooley (after [[Dooley Wilson]], who played the character), and submitted it to 217 agencies. The majority of agencies returned the script unread (often because of policies regarding unsolicited screenplays) or did not respond. However, of those which did respond, only 33 specifically recognized it as ''Casablanca''. Eight others observed that it was similar to ''Casablanca'', and 41 agencies rejected the screenplay outright, offering comments such as "Too much dialogue, not enough exposition, the story line was weak, and in general didn't hold my interest." Three agencies offered to represent the screenplay, and one suggested turning it into a novel.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Most Outrageous Experiment Ever Conducted in the Movie Industry. Do Those Working in the Movies Know the Difference Between John Ford and Henry Ford? Should They? |url=https://www.tvweek.com/open-mic/2012/11/the-most-outrageous-experiment-even-conducted-in-the-movie-industry-do-those-working-in-the-movies-k/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150328213706/https://www.tvweek.com/open-mic/2012/11/the-most-outrageous-experiment-even-conducted-in-the-movie-industry-do-those-working-in-the-movies-k/ |archive-date=2015-03-28 |access-date=December 30, 2018 |website=TVWeek}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Ross |first=Chuck |title=The Great Script Tease |url=https://www.filmcomment.com/issue/november-december-1982/ |access-date=December 30, 2018 |website=Film Comment}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=December 5, 1982 |title=TOPICS; WEATHER EYES; Play It Again |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1982/12/05/opinion/topics-weather-eyes-play-it-again.html |access-date=December 30, 2018 |work=The New York Times |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>

Ebert wrote: <blockquote> Seeing the film over and over again, year after year, I find it never grows overfamiliar. It plays like a familiar musical album: the more I know it, the more I like it. The black-and-white cinematography has not aged as color would. The dialogue is so spare and cynical it has not grown old-fashioned. Much of the emotional effect of ''Casablanca'' is achieved by indirection. As we leave the theater, we are absolutely convinced that the only thing keeping the world from going crazy is the concerns of three little people who do, after all, amount to more than a hill of beans."<ref name=EbertGreatMovie/>
</blockquote>