Note how well Peter uses his face constantly to express each moment. The focus is all on him. Only at the end is the moment Bogie's. Then his face opens up.
By about 1952 he'd become old and puffy and the really-good parts had dried up: he became a more one-dimensional figure, a sort of prop in pictures than the expressive actor that he was in this one.
When they first released the Laurel & Hardy Collection in colour -I treated my self to the box set - I was amazed at how well they coloured the the movies in a sympathetic way - I found that I tended to see more going on in the scenes - than Just in the original B/W - I have searched the dites fof a copy of the colourised version from 1985 i think !
This is horrifying.... Peter Lorre was so sexy in his white(ish) "Casablanca" suit, and then someone said, "You know what? Let's make Ugarte look like a bottle of mustard."
What they could do with colorization in the 1980s pales compared to what they could do with today's technology. They could easily offer a realistic looking HD transfer and make it available as an alternate bonus on a Blu-Ray. But people SCREAMING about the horrors of "ruining" classic movies by providing what they probably would have used but simply could not afford in many of these classics keeps that from happening. People like George Lucas and Ridley Scott even testified before Congress about how editing a film after-the-fact could RUIN the movie (how ironic George kept editing the crap out of his Star Wars movies long after they were released and Ridley, who now has the rights back to his Blade Runner movie REFUSES to let them include the original theatrical release version ever again (with Harrison Ford narration) even though that was the ORIGINAL RELEASED VERSION (like it or not). I simply cannot fathom why we can't have BOTH on a Blu-Ray and let the viewer pick which version he feels like watching instead of having dictator decide for us what we can or cannot see. I would like the original Star Wars in HD too, not George's "Greedo shot first" editing travesty!
I prefer to have the choice to watch either the black and white or colorized versions. If both are available, then I should be the one to choose. This is a simple case of freedom of choice. If the colourization is of quality, I prefer to watch colorized versions. Anyway you call it, it's the right of any individual to choose something as fundamental as what type of movie they want to watch!
Excellent. First time I saw the colored version I was impressed how three dimensional the scene became. Now, a guy's blue vest looks like it's stealing the scene. No.
It is beautiful, but when I watch the movie again I certainly will watch the B/W version. Which makes me wonder.... if I had seen it the first time in color, would I still prefer the B/W version? One thing for sure, the lightning techniques in the B/W recordings were different than in in color movies. Which looks a bit strange in the colored version. Maybe the same effect as in silent movies were acting was different from in the talkies.
"You despise me don't you?".... "Well, if I gave you any thought I probably would ..." NO BETTER PUT DOWN IN HISTORY...Try using it an a non-Hollywood application.
1:04 Unrelated to the colorizing that most people give bad critique about, but Foodfight is responsible for having me think of Cheasel T. Weasel (aka the poop rat) when I hear this line.
This was a pointless exercise. The film was designed to be viewed in b+w, and the moody noirish lighting is an essential contribution to the overall feeling of the film. Whose idea was it to mess with perfection? There's a saying that goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Someone forgot that saying and this travesty is the result.
Anyone who is interested in reading the screenplay for the new movie [The Fight for Love and Glory] which begins as Casablanca ends go to creativescreenplays.com.
Seriously, hobbyists do a better job coloring black and white photos. They just tinted Boggie and Pete's entire heads light-brown, didn't even do anything with the eyes. And by God the background coloring is so lazy....
That's true Mary... But as a filmmaker myself..I just don't want the younger generation to think this was the original version.. Casablanca was lit for black and white film stock..colorization diminishes all of the lighting effects and shadows that make the original version stand out :-)
Turner did this about 25 years ago if I recall.. Notice all of the skin tones look the same..you had to use one color sample for every face back then..
Note how well Peter uses his face constantly to express each moment. The focus is all on him. Only at the end is the moment Bogie's. Then his face opens up.
This is a great observation! Seems like a person one could learn a lot from; I can't stop seeing it now. :-)
He called himself a “facemaker”
Absolutely love Mr. Peter Lorre; an actor of sublime power.....
He is underrated!
peter lorre clearly decades ahead of his time with his method
By about 1952 he'd become old and puffy and the really-good parts had dried up: he became a more one-dimensional figure, a sort of prop in pictures than the expressive actor that he was in this one.
Two great actors always a treat too watch, in black and white or colour.
Peter Lorre is so so good too. The creepiness. And acting creepy. Wow. I like them in colour or black and white.
When they first released the Laurel & Hardy Collection in colour -I treated my self to the box set - I was amazed at how well they coloured the the movies in a sympathetic way - I found that I tended to see more going on in the scenes - than Just in the original B/W - I have searched the dites fof a copy of the colourised version from 1985 i think !
It does feel different this way.
I agree, it feels too cheery and optimistic in color, doesn't fit the story.
I am told I do a 'haunting' Peter Lorre impression. I had to look him up. I think I found a new favorite.
Do you have any videos of your PL?
Same. Only 40 year old I know who goes out of his way to only do vintage voices.
“Rick! My yellow jacket doesn’t match the set, technicolor is making look like a prop! It’s disgusting!”
No more LSD for me.
One critic has been quoted as saying that 'colorising' "Casablanca" is like ''putting arms on the Venus de Milo''.
Help me Rick! I've been turned into a giant bottle of mustard!
I waatched Casablanca full movie here twitter.com/481f63069c6302d44/status/822764955984236544 Casablaaaanca 1942 Peter Lorre Cooolor
Bunnisa tomacha Get lost spambot.
Lol, yeah.
With this strange pastell colors, they all look like big eastereggs.
Classic...just got the DVD that's my Sunday sorted...
Casablanca in color makes no since but it is great to examine how Peter Lorre acts with his face
This is cool just to see what the directors and actors were seeing but the black and white version is the best way experience this film.
Peter Lorre actor legendary 🎭
Theatre 🎭
His hair is a lighter color than I imagined
This is so bizarre!!
peter lorre i saw him in a 1963 movie with vincent price "Commedy of Terrors", almost twice his size than in Casablanca. he died a year after in 1964.
He had a botched surgical procedure as a young man in Germany and he got hooked on morphine trying to control the resulting pain.
Rick plays chess with himself like Philip Marlowe.
This is horrifying.... Peter Lorre was so sexy in his white(ish) "Casablanca" suit, and then someone said, "You know what? Let's make Ugarte look like a bottle of mustard."
When Peter Lorre was in any scene, he was all I wanted to look at.
bruh thats what color the suit was originallyt.
Your the first I've heard describe Peter Lorre as sexy.
@@brandonallen3289 I see you're new to the internet.
Fortunately, there are no plans to release this abomination on Blu-Ray or DVD.
Relax, nerdo. It's just a movie.
I know some people dislike colorized movies, but I think they are pretty cool, would really like to find this online somewhere, downloadable I mean
What they could do with colorization in the 1980s pales compared to what they could do with today's technology. They could easily offer a realistic looking HD transfer and make it available as an alternate bonus on a Blu-Ray. But people SCREAMING about the horrors of "ruining" classic movies by providing what they probably would have used but simply could not afford in many of these classics keeps that from happening.
People like George Lucas and Ridley Scott even testified before Congress about how editing a film after-the-fact could RUIN the movie (how ironic George kept editing the crap out of his Star Wars movies long after they were released and Ridley, who now has the rights back to his Blade Runner movie REFUSES to let them include the original theatrical release version ever again (with Harrison Ford narration) even though that was the ORIGINAL RELEASED VERSION (like it or not). I simply cannot fathom why we can't have BOTH on a Blu-Ray and let the viewer pick which version he feels like watching instead of having dictator decide for us what we can or cannot see. I would like the original Star Wars in HD too, not George's "Greedo shot first" editing travesty!
VonMagXL I agree
It’s so fun seeing them in color after black and white!
Oscar Mason did you ever find it online?
I'm sure the director would not want his art messed with.
What is this sorcery?!
That’s how I felt seeing It’s a Wonderful Life in color as well.
I prefer to have the choice to watch either the black and white or colorized versions. If both are available, then I should be the one to choose. This is a simple case of freedom of choice. If the colourization is of quality, I prefer to watch colorized versions. Anyway you call it, it's the right of any individual to choose something as fundamental as what type of movie they want to watch!
Years later, Peter Lorre would be teamed up with an overweight red cat.
I live in the wrong era
Strangely, the green glass lamp casts no green light on the wall behind it.
Excellent. First time I saw the colored version I was impressed how three dimensional the scene became. Now, a guy's blue vest looks like it's stealing the scene. No.
hey ted!.....great!....put up more......would dearly love to see a complete color version
More like Casa Amarillo
It is beautiful, but when I watch the movie again I certainly will watch the B/W version. Which makes me wonder.... if I had seen it the first time in color, would I still prefer the B/W version? One thing for sure, the lightning techniques in the B/W recordings were different than in in color movies. Which looks a bit strange in the colored version. Maybe the same effect as in silent movies were acting was different from in the talkies.
"You despise me don't you?"....
"Well, if I gave you any thought I probably would ..." NO BETTER PUT DOWN IN HISTORY...Try using it an a non-Hollywood application.
Was this one of those Turner colorization jobby jobs?
Ohhh REN!
Wow I didn't know I was watching Dick Tracy!
Poor Devils
Link movie is color????
Those blues and greens are far too saturated.
♡
Solo ppr curiosidad .
Me gustaria conseguirla coloreada
1:04 Unrelated to the colorizing that most people give bad critique about, but Foodfight is responsible for having me think of Cheasel T. Weasel (aka the poop rat) when I hear this line.
As of I didn't have enough reason to loath that vomitous movie
How was this movie made in 1942 (or 1941) Wasn’t there WW2 fighting? (especially in North Africa)
This was a pointless exercise. The film was designed to be viewed in b+w, and the moody noirish lighting is an essential contribution to the overall feeling of the film. Whose idea was it to mess with perfection? There's a saying that goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Someone forgot that saying and this travesty is the result.
On the contrary, “designed to be viewed?” I beg your pardon, but then why all of the vibrant colors?
Honestly, who the hell cares these days? The original is still there, take it or leave it. It's interesting nonetheless.
I'll stick with Black and White. Thanks tho.
The color is laughable! All the actors look like they're wearing orange Max Factor pancake makeup.
Why colorized movies look so fake in colors and they somewhat yellowish and orange??
Dhanraj Shetty It depends on when it was done and the technology available to the companies colorizing
It's not fake at all: Peter Lorre's father was in fact a bottle of mustard, and indeed, the set for Rick's Cafe was truly painted with lizard piss.
Anyone who is interested in reading the screenplay for the new movie [The Fight for Love and Glory] which begins as Casablanca ends go to creativescreenplays.com.
They did the colours too bright. ..
When they actually was this bright.
Yo he legit sound like Ren from Ren & Stimpy
The guy who made Ren and Stimpy said for Ren's voice he just did his best Peter Lorre impression
Even weirder, those rock star guys with the moptops sound just like one of the Animaniacs!
@@lizzychrome7630 Haven't watched Animaniacs bro but I'm into Beavis and Butt-Head which came around the same time
i like colorized movies... but not this one. The color kills its soul.
Definitely does.
Well, it’s color alright. Not color that looks even remotely convincing or lifelike, but it’s certainly color.
Seriously, hobbyists do a better job coloring black and white photos. They just tinted Boggie and Pete's entire heads light-brown, didn't even do anything with the eyes. And by God the background coloring is so lazy....
NO No No No.
Honestly, this is not as much of an abomination as I was expecting. I think I will stick to B&W though.
UGH! I loathe colorization..Casablanca was lit for black and white film stock..and it should be seen in black and white..
Rob Constantine Nobody is making you watch it, though.
That's true Mary...
But as a filmmaker myself..I just don't want the younger generation to think this was the original version..
Casablanca was lit for black and white film stock..colorization diminishes all of the lighting effects and shadows that make the original version stand out :-)
Yep there were people like you who said the said thing with talkies took away the art of the silent movie.
mark caine Sorry, when did they start adding spoken dialogue to silent pictures?
around 1928..the first all talking picture was "Lights of new York"
WTF is this for real? Or did you colorize a scene? I know there is a colorized version, but this looks.....less than professional.
TheLegendaryBlackBeastOf Aaagh it's actually quite beautiful, like an old 35mm slide!
This is colorized...
Turner did this about 25 years ago if I recall..
Notice all of the skin tones look the same..you had to use one color sample for every face back then..
Is this even the right colour????
Hey, Ted Turner, Leave the B&W movies alone!
This moviee is now avаilable tоo watch hееeеre => twitter.com/1bye5ogcvuilaIh/status/822764955984236544 Cаsablanca 1942 Peter Lorrе Cоlor
The colour is kind of sickly-looking. If you can't colour it to look pretty, don't colour it at all!
Colorizing Casablanca... YUCK!
More like Assablanca.
It was meant for black and white.
I think I've driven through Assablanca...prefer Casablanca much better.
This is amazing, so much better than the original.
Fuck off asshole you dont know nothing casablanca with normal color is the best and the original phooo
I gave this a thumbs down because of the colorization. Might as well paint a moustache on the Mona Lisa
This is blasphemy.
I had to dislike it. It is my favorite movie, hidden underneath disgusting colorization