Well . . . yeah.
It’s nothing new. If you read the original script for what became “Casablanca” it was raw enough to make “Brokeback Mountain” look tame. The Warners loved the concept of the play (refugees in North Africa) but did not think a movie centered on adultery, betrayal, and selfish desire would sell many tickets.
They changed it to the version beloved today — a movie about unselfish love and sacrifice. Does anyone think that if they stuck to a script that had Rick and Ilsa behaving like rutting pigs oblivious to the impact of their actions on others would be a movie that is still valued today?
I agree, but “The Postman Always Rings Twice” (the Garfield/Turner original, not that Nicholson/Lange abomination) still holds its value.
A lot of people forget that we really need both types of morality plays. Without one, the other wears easily and fades fast.
Of course there’s still plenty of adultery, betrayal and selfish desire in the movie. Rick’s basically a rotten SOB (with a seriously wicked sense of humor) until the last 5 minutes of the movie, and even then in 4:30 of that last 5 minutes he’s still ACTING like a rotten SOB, it’s only the final reveal is his real plan that redeems his character.
if they stuck to a script that had Rick and Ilsa behaving like rutting pigs oblivious to the impact of their actions on others would be a movie that is still valued today?
Well, it would be valued by leftist liberals.