# Raiders of the Lost Ark vs. Casablanca



## Tchaikov6 (Mar 30, 2016)

Kind of a random question, and I didn't really know where to put it so I went to community forum on tc. Basically, which one do you think is a better movie (or if you haven't seen them, which one do you think is more influential/ popular).


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

_Casablanca_ owes much of its endless appeal to the fact that it had so many cooks, yet rather than spoiling the broth, each cook added his own unique bit of flavor to the final creation. There was/is a documentary on the making of Casablanca that gave a detailed history of its troubled creation, naming each director, why he replaced his predecessor, and how he subtly transformed what had gone before. I remember no details, but the film, at the least, has left us with about a half-dozen now-immortal lines/memes that I would be shocked, Shocked! if anybody was not aware of them today. Plus Bogart, Rains, Bergman, Lorre, Greenstreet, etc.--what a cast!

I greatly enjoyed _Raiders_, but it is in a different box altogether.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Casablanca, every time. Every single time, and then some...


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Casablanca, no question. That was back when screenwriters wrote real dialogue. 

But both of them do kind of belong together, because Raiders is all about recreating the serials that we all watched as kids in between the "real" movies: action, cliffhangers, larger-than-life heroes.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

This may be the documentary. I'll look at it again.....


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Yep - Casablanca. So many good bits, but my favourite is the singing of the Marseillaise:






~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Strange Magic said:


> This may be the documentary. I'll look at it again.....


Looks good! :tiphat:


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

I once read a post on IMDB when it had discussion forums from a poster who saw the première of Casablanca when he was 11 he thought it was a really bad film and at the time he wrote that post still thought so.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Sloe said:


> I once read a post on IMDB when it had discussion forums from a poster who saw the première of Casablanca when he was 11 he thought it was a really bad film and at the time he wrote that post still thought so.


In fairness to the geezer who posted that, Casablanca wasn't considered to be a great movie immediately, so as an eleven year old he may simply have digested the common bile of people who he admired. These shackles are difficult to loosen. But Casablanca is remarkable from all angles: cast, story, script, direction, look, the whole set of wheels, all greased and gleaming. It has more pearls of lines than any other film I can think of, and it stars maybe the most consistently great actor of them all - Humphrey Bogart. It defies classification, being part romance, part war movie, part propaganda. Could watch it over and over without diminishment of its virtues.

I like the other film too, by the way...


----------



## Guest (Aug 21, 2018)

Worth comparing for their respective portrayals of the Nazis 

I love both of them. Difficult not to rank them highly with their portrayals of male heroism. I think Casablanca has a better supporting cast.


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

_Casablanca_ is the greatest film ever made. _Raiders_ is a really, really good film but unlike _Casablanca_, there is no real character development. And because of that it lacks a certain emotional pull that great literature and great movies have.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Ingélou said:


> Yep - Casablanca. So many good bits, but my favourite is the singing of the Marseillaise:
> 
> :


Oh, yeah! Every time I see that, I'm French, if just for a minute.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

MacLeod said:


> Worth comparing for their respective portrayals of the Nazis
> 
> I love both of them. Difficult not to rank them highly with their portrayals of male heroism. I think Casablanca has a better supporting cast.


Good point about male heroism, with two of the finest actors in maybe their finest roles. I really like Harrison Ford, he portrays nobility and toughness under pressure like an old school actor. There comes a point in great Harrison Ford movies where he stares at the camera with dawning fury and determination that injustice that he's just noticed will not go unpunished. Bogart is one great alpha male actor too, iconic and cool, starred in many films like Key Largo where he's outnumbered but not shy about standing up for himself.

The opening of Casablanca though, where the camera pans across and Bogart is smoking, wearing a white tux, it's hard to find anything more cool. Nowadays he'd be vaping and look lousy - except you just know that Bogart wouldn't be vaping... :lol:


----------



## Norman Gunston (Apr 21, 2018)

Its Soft drink vs Single malt


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Raiders much more over Casablanca. I really don't like Bogart's acting, and find him very unconvincing. The ending was the only part I liked. Ford backs up his machoness with action. Plus Ford is much more funny in the role.


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

They are both amazing movies and worthy of being watched. I have seen Raiders more times, but I give the edge to Casablanca if they are being pitted head to head because the head melting is gross.


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith (Mar 25, 2016)

But _Temple of Doom_ is more exciting.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

_Casablanca_, clearly. However, if it had been _Indiana Jones and the last crusade_ against _Casablanca_, I'd have voted differently. That movie is imo a perfect blend of action and humour, thanks also to the great interactions of Ford and Connery.


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2018)

bharbeke said:


> I give the edge to Casablanca if they are being pitted head to head because the head melting is gross.


Odd, I don't remember any head melting in _Casablanca_...was that in the Director's Cut?


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> Odd, I don't remember any head melting in _Casablanca_...was that in the Director's Cut?


In case you weren't being facetious, the scene I'm talking about is in Raiders. The Nazis don't get the wrath of God employed against them in Casablanca.


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2018)

bharbeke said:


> In case you weren't being facetious, the scene I'm talking about is in Raiders. The Nazis don't get the wrath of God employed against them in Casablanca.


I was. Actually, it used to irk me no end that the BBC decided they could screen ROTLA at family viewing times with judicious cuts to the whole climax of the movie! No face melting!!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

MacLeod said:


> I was. Actually, it used to irk me no end that the BBC decided they could screen ROTLA at family viewing times with judicious cuts to the whole climax of the movie! No face melting!!


That reminds me when my colleague and I were transferred from Amsterdam to Singapore in 1999 - he for 6 months, I for a few years. DVD's were just becoming big, so he bought a DVD player and a DVD of _Basic Instinct_, as he was a huge Sharon Stone fan. Unfortunately for him, any DVD sold in Singapore was (probably still is) censored to remove any hint of nudity. He was not amused.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I like neither of them. Can i throw Jason and the Argonauts into the mix ? Lol


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

No contest. _Casablanca_ has Ingrid Bergman . . . Ingrid Bergman! _Raiders_ has . . . uh . . . uh . . .


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

Paul Freeman may be the name you're searching for (or Karen Allen).


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

bharbeke said:


> Paul Freeman may be the name you're searching for (or Karen Allen).


Whichever was supposed to be the pretty one.


----------



## Guest (Aug 24, 2018)

Merl said:


> I like neither of them. Can i throw Jason and the Argonauts into the mix ? Lol


No! On the grounds that Todd Armstrong is not pretty.


----------



## Guest (Aug 24, 2018)

Art Rock said:


> That reminds me when my colleague and I were transferred from Amsterdam to Singapore in 1999 - he for 6 months, I for a few years. DVD's were just becoming big, so he bought a DVD player and a DVD of _Basic Instinct_, as he was a huge Sharon Stone fan. Unfortunately for him, any DVD sold in Singapore was (probably still is) censored to remove any hint of nudity. He was not amused.


I'm tempted to make some joke about crossing legs, but this is a family-friendly board!


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Oddly, we were on the high street in our local town yesterday, looking at charity shops, and one of the dvds on offer was Casablanca - so we bought it, and hope to watch it (for the umpteenth time) this weekend.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Ingélou said:


> Oddly, we were on the high street in our local town yesterday, looking at charity shops, and one of the dvds on offer was Casablanca - so we bought it, and hope to watch it (for the umpteenth time) this weekend.


We watched it last night - better than ever! Every shot, every line tells.


----------



## Morningsymphony (Aug 24, 2018)

Raiders of the lost ark is cooler


----------



## Guest (Aug 26, 2018)

Which has better original music? Take out the Marseillaise and you still have a fine Steiner score that works for Casablanca. But you also have two great songs written specifically for the movie/play: _Knock on Wood _and _As Time Goes By_.

What does ROTLA have? The Indie fanfare...and a Williams score that works, but no songs and it didn't get a Oscar, thereby proving that Casablanca is superior in this aspect...

...oh, just a minute. Steiner didn't get an Oscar either, but as both were nominated, let's consider who they lost out to. Steiner to Newman for Song of Bernadette, Williams to Vangelis for Chariots of Fire.

Not sure that tells us anything.:lol:


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> Which has better original music? Take out the Marseillaise and you still have a fine Steiner score that works for Casablanca. But you also have two great songs written specifically for the movie/play: _Knock on Wood _and _As Time Goes By_.
> 
> What does ROTLA have? The Indie fanfare...and a Williams score that works, but no songs and it didn't get a Oscar, thereby proving that Casablanca is superior in this aspect...
> 
> ...


As Time Goes By was written in 1931. But themes from the song are integrated into the score very successfully to enhance mood and story.

Apparently (we watched the documentary on the dvd) the producers considered replacing 'As Time Goes By' by a specially written song, after the film had been almost completed. But it would have involved recalling Ingrid Bergman and - she'd had her hair cut!


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

We saw this mentioned on the documentary and it looks good:


----------



## Guest (Aug 26, 2018)

Ingélou said:


> As Time Goes By was written in 1931. But themes from the song are integrated into the score very successfully to enhance mood and story.
> 
> Apparently (we watched the documentary on the dvd) the producers considered replacing 'As Time Goes By' by a specially written song, after the film had been almost completed. But it would have involved recalling Ingrid Bergman and - she'd had her hair cut!


Thank god for the haircut! What would the movie have been like without ATGB?

Interesting that Wiki says it was written for 'Everybody Comes to Rick's', while the documentary posted here (is the same as on the DVD?) says it was for another play ('Everybody's Welcome'?). Either way, it wasn't written specifically for the movie, but its part in creating the classic cannot be overstated.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Casablanca, for all the reasons already stated. Plus Bogart's brilliant way with poker-faced dry humour: "I was misinformed".


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Taggart said:


> We saw this mentioned on the documentary and it looks good:


Wow, that's hilarious and classic Warner Brothers.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Casablanca is like a slice of Gravity's Rainbow, following refugees of war, suggesting action at a distance... Raiders is more of a comic book kinda thing, where action illustrates Zeno's paradox in every possible form... but very well done.

For me, Claude Rains is the best wing man on the planet. On the other hand, I named my last cat Indiana Jones, after he visited the Temple of Doom - the vet.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Kieran said:


> In fairness to the geezer who posted that, Casablanca wasn't considered to be a great movie immediately, so as an eleven year old he may simply have digested the common bile of people who he admired. These shackles are difficult to loosen. But Casablanca is remarkable from all angles: cast, story, script, direction, look, the whole set of wheels, all greased and gleaming. It has more pearls of lines than any other film I can think of, and it stars maybe the most consistently great actor of them all - Humphrey Bogart. It defies classification, being part romance, part war movie, part propaganda. Could watch it over and over without diminishment of its virtues.
> 
> I like the other film too, by the way...


Ingrid Bergman herself did not think the film was so great:






This interview reminds me of interviews of the Swedish actor Stig Järrell most famous for the role as the tyrannic latin teacher in Hets called Frenzy in English who was active at the same time as Ingrid Bergman. He said that he usually got his lines for the scene that was to be recorded at the make up table and had no idea what the film he starred in where about until the recording of the whole film was finished


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

They are both great films.

But they are each great for different reasons.

It's somewhat silly to even compare to determine which is "great"er. So much about each film is so very different. It's like asking which is better: Sneakers, or dress shoes? Surfing, or snowboarding? Soup, or sandwich?


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

pianozach said:


> They are both great films.
> 
> But they are each great for different reasons.
> 
> It's somewhat silly to even compare to determine which is "great"er. So much about each film is so very different. It's like asking which is better: Sneakers, or dress shoes? Surfing, or snowboarding? Soup, or sandwich?


I agree but sometimes silly comparances are funny.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Sloe said:


> I agree but sometimes silly comparances are funny.


Casablanca and Raiders aren't even close to being similar in terms of genre:

*Casablanca* is a romantic drama. The lighting and cinematography are deeply influenced by film noir and expressionist cinema. Soundtrack-wise, there were a half dozen random songs, including the tragically effective _*As Time Goes By*_. Max Steiner's score was based heavily on that song, and "La Marseillaise", transforming them as leitmotifs to reflect changing moods.

*Raiders* is more of an action-adventure film, and was heavily influenced by the serial films of the early 20th-century. John Williams' score was pointedly and deliberately theatrical and excessive, emotionally monumental, and epic (the inclusion of a singing chorus for the Ark of the Covenant scenes) to reflect the moods of the film.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Room2201974 said:


> _Casablanca_ is the greatest film ever made. _Raiders_ is a really, really good film but unlike _Casablanca_, there is no real character development. And because of that it lacks a certain emotional pull that great literature and great movies have.


Not sure I'd go as far as saying greatest film ever made. I will say _Casablanca_ has more quoted lines than any work other than _Hamlet_ . And the character depth makes it satisfy to watch over and over again.

_Raiders_ re-invented the action film, and as such is the more influential of the two. But I can no longer sit through it. I just skip to my favorite sequences.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

I've probably watched ROTLA more than Casablanca, perhaps because it's on TV at more prominent times, but I only have Casablanca (or "Carsablarnca" as the voiceover would have it) on DVD.

Both are great movies, though from different genres, so comparison not easy.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

pianozach said:


> Casablanca and Raiders aren't even close to being similar in terms of genre:
> 
> *Casablanca* is a romantic drama. The lighting and cinematography are deeply influenced by film noir and expressionist cinema. Soundtrack-wise, there were a half dozen random songs, including the tragically effective _*As Time Goes By*_. Max Steiner's score was based heavily on that song, and "La Marseillaise", transforming them as leitmotifs to reflect changing moods.
> 
> *Raiders* is more of an action-adventure film, and was heavily influenced by the serial films of the early 20th-century. John Williams' score was pointedly and deliberately theatrical and excessive, emotionally monumental, and epic (the inclusion of a singing chorus for the Ark of the Covenant scenes) to reflect the moods of the film.


I guess we don´t have the same humour I think the idea of comparing two really different films that can´t be compared with each other is really funny.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I have not seen either movie, but recognize that Casablanca has been around a lot longer that Raiders. Given that I am not fond of wild special effects (the old BBC Narnia is my style, not the new Disney Narnia), I would guess that Casablanca is the better movie as it would be more realistic. Modern day special effects (well even perhaps starting in the 1970s) are just to absurdly unrealistic for me.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

SixFootScowl said:


> I have not seen either movie, but recognize that Casablanca has been around a lot longer that Raiders. Given that I am not fond of wild special effects (the old BBC Narnia is my style, not the new Disney Narnia), I would guess that Casablanca is the better movie as it would be more realistic. Modern day special effects (well even perhaps starting in the 1970s) are just to absurdly unrealistic for me.


I think you'll find that there were 'special effects' in Casablanca too (Butler and Enger credited a/c IMDB). In that particular case, the process shots weren't too bad, but modern effects - provided there isn't an excess of CGI - look more realistic. It's just that they are most prominent in fantasy and sci-fi.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Forster said:


> I think you'll find that there were 'special effects' in Casablanca too (Butler and Enger credited a/c IMDB). In that particular case, the process shots weren't too bad, but modern effects - provided there isn't an excess of CGI - look more realistic. It's just that they are most prominent in fantasy and sci-fi.


They used miniature models of air planes and air planes made of paper. The reason why there is fog in the ending scene is to make it less obvious that the air plane is not real.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

I feel most for the Moroccans in Casablanca.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

SixFootScowl said:


> I have not seen either movie, but recognize that Casablanca has been around a lot longer that Raiders. Given that I am not fond of wild special effects (the old BBC Narnia is my style, not the new Disney Narnia), I would guess that Casablanca is the better movie as it would be more realistic. Modern day special effects (well even perhaps starting in the 1970s) are just to absurdly unrealistic for me.


*Just found this relevant quote*:
"Classic movies are often heavily dialogue-based, which provides a necessary counterpoint to the visually stimulating and soundbite-driven modern method of moviemaking."


----------



## Jay (Jul 21, 2014)

Kieran said:


> Casablanca, every time. Every single time, and then some...


Yup. Spielberg ruined the movies.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Jay said:


> Yup. Spielberg ruined the movies.


I had no idea the movies had been ruined, never mind that it was our dear Steven's fault.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

SixFootScowl said:


> *Just found this relevant quote*:
> "Classic movies are often heavily dialogue-based, which provides a necessary counterpoint to the visually stimulating and soundbite-driven modern method of moviemaking."


Unless you're watching a movie scripted by Aaron Sorkin (modern, dialogue heavy) or Buster Keaton (classic, visually stimulating).

Whoever Gary DeMar is, I'm not paying money to listen to his worldview.


----------



## Jay (Jul 21, 2014)

Forster said:


> I had no idea the movies had been ruined, never mind that it was our dear Steven's fault.


See, you learn something new every day. But, he didn't do it alone; he had help from Lucas.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Forster said:


> Unless you're watching a movie scripted by Aaron Sorkin (modern, dialogue heavy) or Buster Keaton (classic, visually stimulating).
> 
> Whoever Gary DeMar is, I'm not paying money to listen to his worldview.


I don't agree with all of Gary's worldview. I take what I can use and skip the rest. For one thing he is into some strange eschatology.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Jay said:


> See, you learn something new every day. But, he didn't do it alone; he had help from Lucas.


I didn't notice either of them ruined The Irishman, or The Trial of the Chicago Seven, or Spotlight or 3 Billboards or Gravity, or Arrival or...

I hope you get the idea.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Jay said:


> Yup. Spielberg ruined the movies.





Forster said:


> I had no idea the movies had been ruined, never mind that it was our dear Steven's fault.





Jay said:


> See, you learn something new every day. But, he didn't do it alone; he had help from Lucas.


_*"Ruined"?*_

Of the dozens of films that Spielberg and Lucas produced, wrote, or directed, there's bound to be a few dogs, and a probably several that are even debatable as to their worth.

There are also many that are highly decorated, receiving many honors and awards from those that award them.

*From Spielberg?
*
Schindler's List
Duel
Saving Private Ryan
Empire of the Sun
War Horse

*Lucas?*

Powaqqatsi	
Willow 
Tucker: The Man and His Dream
Labyrinth
THX 1138
American Graffiti


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Casablanca. Obviously. 
More engaging plot, better acted, good cinematography.


----------



## MAS (Apr 15, 2015)

I loved them both: pineapples and oranges.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Pat Fairlea said:


> More engaging plot, better acted, good cinematography.


Interesting opinions, especially re acting. The two movies demand something different from their actors, so I'm not sure I could compare and declare one better.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Forster said:


> Interesting opinions, especially re acting. The two movies demand something different from their actors, so I'm not sure I could compare and declare one better.


Fair point, but what would this thread be without baseless opinions? I'm really quite fond of the first couple of Indiana Jones films and have probably watched them as many times as Casablanca.


----------



## bz3 (Oct 15, 2015)

Only thing I can see they have in common is that they're both hokum. I guess I prefer Casablanca but I doubt I'll ever watch either again.


----------

