What a journey it has been, to complete this in-depth study
of this brilliant screenplay! It has given me a tremendous sense of
fulfillment, as this is the first script I have studied in such minute detail.
But more that that, this study has humbled me, and has made me wonder once
again at the power of the moving pictures.
There is one point I always make during my introductory
lecture at a writing workshop. We all will agree that the screenplay of a great
film is as rich and layered as a good novel, and is as true and relevant as the
stories from real life. What most of us do not realize is that the amount of
written word a screenplay uses to create this involving, enriching
story-experience is much, much less than that of novels. A typical screenplay
is less than 120 pages long, and each page has more blank space than letters
and words. If you formatted a screenplay like a novel, it would not take more
than 50 pages. To still achieve what great movies do is not only among the most
supreme achievements of writing, it is a wonder how they do it. ‘Casablanca’ is
and will always remain a prototype of what screenwriting can achieve.
It must be mentioned here that the script of ‘Casablanca’
was only half completed when the shoot began. The writing continued as they
shot. In fact during the last days of production, scenes were written on the
morning they were being shot. It might give us a wrong idea that this is how it
can be done. If this unorganized, ad hoc
writing could produce a movie of this stature, we could easily create
half-decent movies with similar approach. We must realize that the screenplay
was based on a play, and hence the story was very much in place when they
started shooting. The bottom-line of this discussion is – go ahead if you do
not have the patience to complete the dialogue draft and start shooting, but in
your head, and in the heads of all cast and crew, the story must be extremely
clear. And that story should be as powerful, rich, and emotionally involving as
this. As someone rightly remarked, and I cannot agree more, that the most
important thing for a film is not the script, but the story.
And what a brilliant story ‘Casablanca’ is. Using a unique,
but now dated setting, it works even today because it is based on certain
archetypes. It is the story of love and loss, of trust and betrayal, of loyalty
and courage, and thus it is and will always remain relatable for all of us. But
more than anything, it is the story of human vulnerabilities, against our most
intimate emotions as well as the brutal force around us. And it is the story of
winning over those vulnerabilities, with the help of our virtues, the inherent
goodness and strength deep within us. We love our characters in this film
because they are as vulnerable as we are, and we admire them because they are
as virtuous as we should be. And then, we really, really want to listen to this
story, and we want to know what happens in the end.
Despite adopting a classical three-act structure, this
script breaks some conventions, and breaks them really well. With an extremely
long set-up, and a very late arriving main plot, the film’s first act consumes
forty per cent of it. This is not only unusual, I would go on to say that it is
not advisable. But then, if this is the structure you want to adopt, the
screenplay teaches you how to do it. A MacGuffin introduced in the first page,
using extremely involving sub-plots to create the illusion of main plot, creating
some unforgettable cinematic characters, including those with small parts, and
giving them some of the best lines ever heard on film, the script keeps you
involved and guessing. It plays with your expectations, constantly, and it
delays exposition teasingly. The exposition also works because of a very solid
back-story, believable and very relatable. In fact, it is a wonder how the
emotional depth of the back-story, that actually becomes the emotional spine of
the film, has been conveyed to us so magically. During my latest re-watch of
the film, I was crying and smiling, as if it were my own story. I believe that
this emotional resonance the film manages to achieve has also to do with how it
controls it rhythm. It slows down at the right moments, to let us anticipate,
feel, think, and come closer to the emotional space of our characters, so that
when it picks up, we are not thinking any more, but reacting emotionally, and
urgently to whatever they are doing on screen.
The aural ambience of the film is almost unparalleled. It
does not have the irreverence of a Tarantino, nor the incision of an Allen. And
yet it is a classical example of how film dialogue should be – attractive,
pleasing at different levels, and most importantly, true to each character. And
then there are image systems, as discussed under the heading “themes” in the
ten preceding posts of mine. Since it is based on a play, there is a lot to
hear, but there also is a lot to see, and it goes beyond the charismatic
insouciance of Bogart or the endearing beauty of Bergman.
And then, the ending! “Wow them in the end!” – advises
Robert McKee’s character in ‘Adaptation’, the film where he claims ‘Casablanca’
to be the best screenplay ever written. I’m grateful to McKee for leading me to
this detailed study of this script and also for giving this mantra. I’ll always keep in mind the
climax of this film as an example of a “wow finish”, something that Rick
himself had seeded around mid-point.
A brilliant love story, an extremely engaging and powerful
political drama, with elements of urbane comedy and a musical, it is rich and
varied. It is driven by characters who will shine forever, and remind us of
what being human is, or can be. For its sheer brilliance, and timeless appeal,
I most humbly recommend ‘Casablanca’ as a must-watch-before-you die (#44),
before I formally conclude this study of its screenplay. Informally, studying
and learning from it will continue, for as long as I live. I am pretty certain
of that.
These are the top ten English-language classics I watched in 2019. 
On 15th of October, I watched 'Boyhood' for the first time at the Mumbai Film Festival and recommended it as a must-watch-before-you-die. Exactly one month later, on the 15th of November, I watched it again in a packed evening show. Since then, I cannot stop thinking about it and I feel the earlier post that carried a small discussion on it does not do justice to the film. Hence this post, and a stronger tone of recommendation.
But is the fact that it was shot over twelve years using the same set of actors the only thing that makes 'Boyhood' a great film? Of course not. Because then it would be easy to beat it, right? Let us start making a film today to be released after twenty years. There you go - we have a greater film! We all know that it doesn't work like that. Even if we try to underplay the passion and the persistence that the makers of this 'project' possessed, writing new scenes every year, shooting for a few days, and then going back to their other commitments, before reuniting again next year, we cannot ignore the wonderfully written scenes that became its ingredients and the imaginative edit that seamlessly joined it, with unforgettable transitions. I would recommend watching this movie more than once because only then you stop bothering about the plot and the whats and focus on how the film is one great scene after another, delicious dialogues, charming performances, and a gutsy, authoritative, self-assured narrative pieced together by perhaps the most organic editing in the history of scripted fiction films. Without getting overtly dramatic, and not once losing its tone, the film mimics life itself. It is like a great Marquez novel, containing within itself all that is funny and all that is sad about the human condition, with insights and themes that speak differently to different people in the audience, and also that will speak differently to us at different stages in our lives. If you are not convinced by the greatness of the film, try watching it about ten years down the line and you will find how the film appears all fresh. Today, I react to it like a son, although I relate most with the young boyish-man character played by Ethan Hawke. But ten years from today, I think I would react to it as a husband, or a father. How often does cinema come with this unique ability to reinvent itself with every passing decade? What else can be called 'timeless' if not this? And which other film can be called 'an unassuming masterpiece' as Peter Travers calls it in his glorious review of it?
I have taken more than six months to come up with this new recommendation as a "must watch", the last being 'Holy Motors' (2012), despite having watched several great movies in this period. But I am very glad while doing this because 'Enter the Void' fits perfectly into the idea that had made me start this series more than three years ago. If you have not watched this hypnotizing, stunning, dream-like, trance-like fim, you are seriously missing out on something. It is indulgance at its best, and watching it makes you feel dizzy, and ecstatic, because the pleasure it offers to your senses is extraordinary by any standards. Very early in the film is a brilliant play of light and sounds, reminding you of the Stargate sequence from '2001: A Space Oddyssey' and you really don't want it to end. Exceptional in its beauty, it may even inspire you to try hard drugs, if this is really what they make you experience. I couldn't tell, but let me confess honestly that I did ponder over the possibility of following our largely-invisible protagonist into the world of substance. I must be grateful to the rest of the film that not only, through the painful journey the guy experiences, kind of warned me against such an experiment, but also let me have a long, intimate glimpse of what a "trip" could be without any real danger. The film, is a trip. But it's also a wonderful meditation on the issues of death, afterlife, reincarnation, out-of-body experiences, incest, and love. You may not want to watch it with your kids or your parents, but you must watch this film, and it would be great if you could couple it with a mental state that suits it well. I will write briefly about my mental state as I watched it, before signing off.
It is very important for a festival to end well, or for anything to end well, for that matter. Since you can not predict the qualities of individual movies in such festivals, it is always a risk you take by making your choices. As always, a well-informed choice is generally a better choice. I was expecting the final day to be good, because some of the most high-profile movies were left. But I had no idea it will be such a great day that it will actually conclude my festival on such a high note.
As mentioned in a previous post, I did organise my own "Toronto in Andheri Film Festival" and ended up watching 10 films in the last few days. The greatest pleasure of such an exercise is to watch some films you wouldn't otherwise, and discover new film-makers. This time, I also watched a couple of films that I had been waiting to watch for a long, long time.
Closing Film: Antonia's Line (People's Choice Award 1995/ Netherlands/ Marleen Gorris) Rightly called a "feminist fairy tale", this Dutch film does what films seldom do. Breaking the rules of conventional film-writing, with a narrative reminiscent of a Marquez novel, and the words flowing like some of the great poems you have read, this Oscar-winner is not only the perfect closing film for this beautiful experience of a festival, but I also name it as a Must-watch-before-you-die. (#38)
I introduced a new movie to the current batch of students I am teaching the subject 'Understanding Cinema'. One day before the screening, I sent this SMS to the students: The screening of "the strangest film ever made" will start at 2.10 pm sharp. Please have a light lunch before it starts. Empty or too full stomachs will make it difficult for you to watch the film. Also, feel free to walk out as I don't expect all of you to bear it entirely.
