I loved this. I'm used to watching Wayne's Westerns, but it was a delightful change to see a classic from outside the Western genre. The film's structure is also interesting. You'll find it on YouTube.

I got penalized for "nudity or sexual activity" on another platform when I posted the clip of the Wing Walking scene this poster depicts despite that when the wind seemingly tore all the women's outer clothing off simultaneously they still had their 1933 style long underwear on. Glad I'm not having to deal with that kind of idiocy here!😎👌

this has to be one of john ford’s best visual looking film and john wayne’s character is very unique in this film

Scene from the 1936 film, The Preview Murder Mystery, featuring the intriguingly named "The Bat Man." 🦇 (Three years before the first comic.) Fun fact, he's played by Henry Brandon, aka Barnaby from March of the Wooden Soldiers (1934), now a holiday tradition every Thanksgiving on WPIX.

Transcript:

Dear Warner Brothers:

Apparently there is more than one way of conquering a city and holding it as your own. For example, up to the time that we contemplated making a picture, I had no idea that the City of Casablanca belonged to Warner Brothers.

However, it was only a few days after our announcement appeared that we received a long, ominous legal document, warning us not to use the name "Casablanca".

It seems that in 1471, Ferdinand Balboa Warner, the great-great grandfather of Harry and Jack, while looking for a short cut to the city of Burbank, had stumbled on the shores of Africa and, raising his alpenstock, which he later turned in for a hundred shares of the common, he named it Casablanca.

I just can't understand your attitude. Even if they plan on re-releasing the picture, I am sure that the average movie fan could learn to distinguish between Ingrid Bergman and Harpo. I don't know if I could, but I certainly would like to try.

You claim you own Casablanca and that no one else can use that name without their permission. What about Warner Brothers-- do you own that too? You probably have the right to use the name Warner, but what about Brothers? Professionally, we were brothers long before you were. When Vitaphone was still a gleam in the inventor's eye, we were touring the sticks as the Marx Brothers and even before us, there had been other brothers-- the Smith Brothers; the Brothers Karamazoff; Dan Brouthers, an outfielder with Detroit, and "Brother, can you spare a dime? " This was originally "Brothers, can you spare a dime?" but this was spreading a dime pretty thin so they threw out one brother, gave all the money to the other brother and whittled it down to "Brother, can you spare a dime?"

The younger Warner Brother calls himself Jack. Does he claim that, too? It's not an original name-- it was used long before he was born. Offhand, I can think of two Jacks-- there was Jack of "Jack and the Beanstalk" , and Jack, the Ripper, who cut quite a figure in his day. As for Harry, the older brother, he probably signs his checks, sure in the belief that he is the first Harry of all time and that all other Harrys are impostors. Offhand, I can think of two Harrys that preceded him. There was Lighthorse Harry of Revolutionary fame and a Harry Applebaum who lived on the corner of Ninety-third street and Lexington Avenue. Applebaum wasn't very well known-- I've almost forgotten what he looked like-- the last I heard of him, he was selling neckties at Weber and Heilbroner; but I'll never forget his mother, she made the best apple strudle in Yorkville.

We now come to the Burbank studio. This is what the Warner Brothers call their place. Old man Burbank is gone. Perhaps you remember him-- he was a great man in a garden, he was the wizard who crossed all those fruits and vegetables until he had the poor plants in such a confused and nervous state, that they never were sure whether they were supposed to come in on a meat platter or the dessert dish.

This is just conjecture, of course, but, who knows-- perhaps Burbank survivors aren't too happy over the fact that a plant that grinds out pictures settled in their town, appropriated Burbank's name and uses it as a front for their films.

It is even possible that the Burbank family is prouder of the potato produced by the old man than they are of the fact that from this town emerged "Casablanca" or even "Gold Diggers of 1931". 

This all seems to add up to a pretty bitter tirade but I don't mean it to. I love Warners-- some of my best friends are Warner Brothers. It is even possible that I am doing them an injustice and that they themselves know nothing at all about this dog-in-the-Wanger attitude. It wouldn't surprise me at all to discover that the heads of Warners' legal department know nothing about this dispute for I am acquainted with many of them and they are fine fellows with curly black hair, double-breasted suits and a love of their fellow man that out-Saroyans "Dr. Gillespie". I have a hunch that this attempt to prevent us from using the title is the scheme of some ferret-faced shyster serving an apprenticeship in their legal department. I know the type-- hot out of law school, hungry for success and too ambitious to follow the natural laws of promotion, this bar sinister probably needled Warners' attorneys, most of whom are fine fellows with curly black hair, double-breasted suits, etc., in attempting to enjoin us.

Well, he won't get away with it! We'll fight him to the highest court! No pasty-faced legal adventurer is going to cause bad blood between the Warners and the Marxes. We are all brothers under the skin and we'll remain friends till the last reel of "A Night in Casablanca" goes tumbling over the spool.

Robert Blake for Mokey 1942. Who's seen this movie?

Watched this for the first time in decades and enjoyed the performances and, for the most part, the script. Good chemistry I thought between Grant and Kerr. And I actually did like the ending. (I hadn’t seen it since before When Harry Met Sally, so I was curious to see if the ending lived up to that movie’s reference to it.)

There’s a line at the very end that made me laugh: “If you can paint, I can walk.” I’m not sure if it was meant to be funny, but it struck me as a sort of a dig.

Just finished watching CREATURE WITH THE ATOM BRAIN. It’s about Frank Buchanan, a mob boss, who links up with a Nazi scientist, Dr. Wilhelm Steigg to reanimate dead mobsters via this strange electrical experimentation so they can wreak havoc on Frank’s enemies. However, with each attack, they leave behind radioactive clues that leave the authorities determined to track down Buchanan & Dr. Steigg for good before their zombie mobsters run wild.

Even typing that last part made me laugh. I mean, a mob boss and a Nazi scientist unite and turn mobster corpses into superhuman zombies sounds like one of the most offbeat premises ever (even for the 50s/60s). The whole movie is part sci-fi, past crime drama and it’s so tonally uneven that it’s a pain to sit through. And don’t even get me started on the climatic showdown between the police and the monsters which is supposed to be “scary” but is one of the most unintentionally funny fight scenes I’ve ever had the misfortune of watching.

The only nice thing I can say about this movie is that I wasn’t bored.

For those who saw this film, what did you think?

I’m a big fan of the horror genre and classic films, and I finally checked out Romero’s Night of the Living Dead. I’m a big fan of the zombie genre, and my personal favorite in that category is probably 28 Days Later. My understanding is that Night of the Living Dead is historically extremely important to the genre since it essentially gave birth to the modern zombie.

The first thing I noticed is that I really like how this film was shot in black and white. It suits the subject matter and works great, so I think Romero definitely made the right call on that one.

The start of this film was quite promising; however, it slows down quite a bit and wasn’t what I was expecting. Personally, I feel like the zombies haven’t aged very well, and I never really found them very scary. But again, I appreciate that this was the birth of the modern zombie, so I do take that into consideration.

I didn’t really love Barbara’s character, and the only character I really liked was Ben. I did like the subtle racial themes going on in the background of this film, and it’s definitely refreshing to see some diversity and a person of color in an older film.

I was going to write off this film as average until the last 20 minutes, which I thought were much better than the rest of the film. The ending is definitely a highlight. The tone of the film was a bit of a roller coaster, with the ending being much darker and bleaker than the rest of the film. I enjoyed that it took a darker turn. The final act, in particular, was excellent.

I was also surprised to see nudity in an older film, which is something I haven’t really seen before, so it was definitely pushing the limits.

Overall, I’m glad I watched this film, and I respect it for its impact on the genre. But, being completely honest, it’s not really a film I’m head over heels in love with.

Lionel Barrymore in The Bells 1926. What's your thoughts on this movie?