Skip to main content

This food doesn’t look any more poisoned than any other hotel food.

A Night in Casablanca
(1946)

(SPOILERS) After a run of films of waning quality – and a five-year gap – the Marx Brothers delivered a very pleasant surprise with this remarkably respectable bounce back, so good, it can happily be mentioned in the same breath as their first two MGM pictures. True, this isn’t on a par with the unbridled anarchy we saw in the Paramount pictures, but there are enough proficient set pieces and sustained routines to confirm A Night in Casablanca’s status as seriously underrated.

Kornblow: After all, I’m a man and you’re a woman… and I can’t think of a better argument.

The key to this seems to be that they rehearsed major scenes during a pre-filming tour. That, and the picture was a self-financed effort, only released through UA. Writers Joseph Fields (the Gentlemen Prefer Blondes musical), Roland Kibbee (later of The Bob Newhart Show) and an uncredited Frank Tashlin (who would get a full credit on swansong Love Happy) do something slightly different, in conjunction with director Archie Mayo, presenting a movie scenario that the brothers just happen to step into and then mould to their will. In some scenes (notably between the romantic leads in a night club) you’d be forgiven for thinking this was a bona fide film noir.

Mr Smythe: Sir, this lady is my wife. You should be ashamed.
Kornblow: If this lady is your wife, YOU should be ashamed.

The myth behind the movie is that Warner Bros threatened a lawsuit for using “Casablanca” in the title, the truth being that they didn’t, and that an originally intended direct spoof of that film was nixed at an early stage. There is a “Round up all likely suspects” line, however, which appears to have been overdubbed from the Casablanca version to avoid legal reprisals. The actual plot as has a Nazi war criminal looking to secure war loot (art treasures, including a Rembrandt) hidden in the Hotel Casablanca via the rather tenuous method of killing successive managers in order to be appointed manager himself. The latest of whom is Groucho’s relatively restrainedly (in name) Ronald Kornblow (it’s the lack of the initial, I think).

Beatrice (Groucho has climbed into the space where she’s hiding): What are you doing in here?
Kornblow: I have new respect for the count. He certainly knows how to pack a trunk.

On the downside, there’s no Margaret Dumont, but the considerable up is that the Nazi war criminal, sporting various follicular appliances as a disguise, in particular a free-ranging toupee, is played by Sig Ruman, star villain of A Night at the Opera and A Day at the Races. His Heinrich Stubel (or Count Pfefferman, as he is purporting to be) is duly the butt of a series of insults and routines, the most magnificent of which is a protracted packing sequence in which Kornblow, accompanied by Harpo (as Rusty) and Chico (as Corbaccio) – with shady lady Beatrice (Lisette Verea) also hiding out having changed sides when she finds she is being ditched – frustrates his attempts to put anything in any case or trunk or remove it from drawers or cupboards for that matter. Ruman’s gradually evolving perplexed state is priceless.

Kornblow: I remember when this was all dancefloor.

It takes a while to meet Chico and Groucho, adding to the sense at the outset that this is a “proper” film. Indeed, the sight gag “Say, what do you think you’re doing? Holding up the building?” directed at Harpo looks impressively expensive (in contrast to the later. entirely make-do elevator crash, when Harpo cuts the wires to free a trapped Groucho). Harpo and Chico naturally get their own musical interludes, but a sign of their control is perhaps that we see Harpo putting his leg in a woman’s hand for the first time in forever (she flicks ash into his open shoe) and then honks her away. Not quite the Harpo of Paramount days, but unrulier than he’s been in a long while. He also manages to “insult” Beatrice by appearing with an even longer cigar holder than she has, and then blowing bubbles through it (another bit of business involving Verea finds her and Groucho “seductively” blowing smoke at each other; she corpses when he engulfs her in a cloud of cigar smoke). He also wins at roulette, despite Groucho warning him off (“You sure you want to go through with this? Remember what happened in 1929”).

Beatrice: Oh, come on now. You wouldn’t say no to a lady.
Kornblow: I don’t know, why not? They always say no to me.

At one point, Chico and Harpo, in order to come up with some money for romantic lead Charles Drake – as Lieutenant Delmar, who has his reputation to clear; he’s as eminently forgettable as his love interest Annette (Lois Collier) – fill the hotel dancefloor with tables and chairs to provide for additional paying guests, leaving Groucho and Beatrice with ever-diminishing space to sashay. Another sequence finds Groucho’s meal scoffed by bodyguards Harpo and Chico, on the grounds that it may be poisoned (Harpo doing a seal impression) – “Wouldn’t it be great if they ate each other?” concludes Groucho.

Kornblow: You know, I think you’re the most beautiful woman in the whole world.
Beatrice: Do you really?
Kornblow: No, but I don’t mind lying if it’ll get me somewhere.

Groucho delivers a succession of great lines, even if it’s perhaps true that he isnt offered a classic grandstanding scene of insulting someone or pulling the wool over their eyes. He gets out of buying champagne (“Buy this lady a cheese sandwich and charge it to her”), expresses reluctance at the strictures of his job (“I see. You want a manager that doesn’t steal money. Good day, gentlemen”) and finds Chico’s warnings a bind (“I don’t mind being killed, but I resent hearing about it by a character whose head comes to a point”).

Kornblow (he and Beatrice are blowing smoke at each other): This is like living in Pittsburgh – if you can call that living.

The picture does rather devolve into a pedestrian chase climax, following the highpoint of the packing scene, but even then, there’s the diversion of Harpo pulling insane faces as he flies a plane (and repeatedly hits the actual pilot on the head). And, in perhaps the clearest nod to their roots, the final shot has the trio pursuing Beatrice following her wistful glance at the united lovers (“If a thing like that could only happen to me”).



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

Captain, he who walks in fire will burn his feet.

The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen returns to the kind of unadulterated fantasy material that made Jason and the Argonauts such a success – swords & stop motion, if you like. In between, there were a couple of less successful efforts, HG Wells adaptation First Men in the Moon and The Valley of the Gwangi (which I considered the best thing ever as a kid: dinosaur walks into a cowboy movie). Harryhausen’s special-effects supremacy – in a for-hire capacity – had also been consummately eclipsed by Raquel Welch’s fur bikini in One Million Years B.C . The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the expected Dynamation template – blank-slate hero, memorable creatures, McGuffin quest – but in its considerable favour, it also boasts a villainous performance by nobody-at-the-time, on-the-cusp-of-greatness Tom Baker.

You’re going to make me drop a donkey.

Encanto (2021) (SPOILERS) By my estimation, Disney brand pictures are currently edging ahead of the Pixars. Not that there’s a whole lot in it, since neither have been at full wattage for a few years now. Raya and the Last Dragon and now Encanto are collectively just about superior to Soul and Luca . Generally, the animation arm’s attempts to take in as much cultural representation as they possibly can, to make up for their historic lack of woke quotas, has – ironically – had the effect of homogenising the product to whole new levels. So here we have Colombia, renowned the world over for the US’s benign intervention in their region, not to mention providing the CIA with subsistence income, beneficently showered with gifts from the US’s greatest artistic benefactor.

My hands hurt from galloping.

Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021) (SPOILERS) Say what you like about the 2016 reboot, at least it wasn’t labouring under the illusion it was an Amblin movie. Ghostbusters 3.5 features the odd laugh, but it isn’t funny, and it most definitely isn’t scary. It is, however, shamelessly nostalgic for, and reverential towards, the original(s), which appears to have granted it a free pass in fan circles. It didn’t deserve one.

I’ve heard the dancing’s amazing, but the music sucks.

Tick, Tick… Boom! (2021) (SPOILERS) At one point in Tick, Tick… Boom! – which really ought to have been the title of an early ’90s Steven Seagal vehicle – Andrew Garfield’s Jonathan Larson is given some sage advice on how to find success in his chosen field: “ On the next, maybe try writing about what you know ”. Unfortunately, the very autobiographical, very-meta result – I’m only surprised the musical doesn’t end with Larson finishing writing this musical, in which he is finishing writing his musical, in which he is finishing writing his musical… – takes that acutely literally.

He has dubiety about his identity, possibly.

The Tender Bar (2021) (SPOILERS) George continues to flog his dead horse of a directorial career. It has to be admitted, however, that he goes less astray here than with anything he’s called the shots on in a decade ( Suburbicon may be a better movie overall, but the parts that grind metal are all ones Clooney grafted onto the Coen Brothers’ screenplay). For starters, he gives Batffleck a role where he can shine, and I’d given up on that being possible. Some of the other casting stretches credulity, but by setting his sights modestly, he makes The Tender Bar passably slight for the most part.

If this were a hoax, would we have six dead men up on that mountain?

The X-Files 4.24: Gethsemane   Season Four is undoubtedly the point at which the duff arc episodes begin to amass, encroaching upon the decent ones for dominance. Fortunately, however, the season finale is a considerable improvement’s on Three’s, even if it’s a long way from the cliffhanger high of 2.25: Anasazi .

What would you do with a diseased little island?

28 Days Later (2002) (SPOILERS) Evolution’s a nasty business. If not for its baleful influence, all those genetically similar apes – or bats – would be unable to transmit deadly lab-made viruses to humans and cause a zombie plague. Thank the lord we’ve got science on our side, to save us from such scientifically approved, stamped and certified terrors. Does Danny Boyle believe in the programming he expounds? As in, is he as aware of 28 Days Later ’s enforcement of the prescribed paradigm in the same manner as the product placement he oversees in every other frame of the movie (and yes, he could have chosen the Alex Cox option for the latter; it would at least have shown some wit)?

Who gave you the crusade franchise? Tell me that.

The Star Chamber (1983) (SPOILERS) Peter Hyams’ conspiracy thriller might simply have offered sauce too weak to satisfy, reining in the vast machinations of an all-powerful hidden government found commonly during ’70s fare and substituting it with a more ’80s brand that failed to include that decade’s requisite facile resolution. There’s a good enough idea here – instead of Charles Bronson, it’s the upper echelons of the legal system resorting to vigilante justice – but The Star Chamber suffers from a failure of nerve, repenting its premise just as it’s about to dig into the ramifications.