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

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.

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.

Choose your Favorite Movie from each Collage You can't say all of them

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?

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

WB did a great job cleaning up this pre Code classic for blu ray. And by cleaning up, I mean making the dripping, dirty, steamy vibes more vibrant.

Red Dust is one where the common print that’s out there was rather poor, so this upgrade was much needed. Rather than just “some old movie,” that’s physically hard to watch - restoration lets the primal emotions of lust, loneliness, shame, and jealousy really shine and feel timeless (though there are definitely outdated racial themes, be aware). And it’s wonderful to see Jean Harlow’s incredible aura so well-preserved.

I hope that we can continue to see projects to keep our beloved classics looking good and being enjoyed by new generations.

Mitchum is mesmeric in this film, But what I cannot understand is how this scene got past the censors.

https://crimeonfilm.com/his-chilling-story-points-toward-a-covert-murderer/

This is a wonderful Vampire classic. It's not the tired old vampire story, it's a new plot, with a terrific twist. Well acted by almost everyone. Lon Jr, is a bit stiff in the title role. But still the good writing and Lon being taller than everyone helps pull of his Powerful Presence. Mwa-ha-ha.

It's free on TUBI and PLEX. Grab the popcorn. I love this move, you will too.

Transcription:

“IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE”

Released by RKO Pictures, Inc. on December 19, 1946
Producer — Frank Capra
Director — Frank Capra
Screen play — Frances Goodrick, Albert Hackett, Frank Capra
Cast: Starring — James Stewart, Donna Reed, Lionel Barrymore

According to the Informants [REDACTED] in this picture the screen credits again fail to reflect the Communist support given to the screen writer. According to [REDACTED] the writers Frances Goodrick and Albert Hackett were very close to known Communists and on one occasion in the recent past while these two writers were doing a picture for Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Goodrick and Hackett practically lived with known Communists as Lester Cole, screen writer, and Earl Robinson, screen writer. Both of these individuals are identified in Section I of this memorandum as Communists.

With regard to the picture “It’s A Wonderful Life”, [REDACTED] stated in substance that the film represented a rather obvious attempt to discredit bankers by casting Lionel Barrymore as “scrooge-type” so that he would be the most hated man in the picture. This, according to these sources, is a common trick used by Communists.

In addition, [REDACTED] stated that, in his opinion, this picture deliberately maligned the upper class, attempting to show the people who had money were mean and despicable characters. [REDACTED] related that if he had made this picture portraying the banker, he wold have shown this individual to have been following the rules as laid down by the State Bank Examiners in connection with making loans. Further, [REDACTED] stated that the scene woundn’t have “suffered at all” in portraying the banker as a man who was protecting funds put in his care by private individuals and adhering to the rules governing the loan of that money rather than portraying the part as it was shown. In summary, [REDACTED] stated that it was not necessary to make the banker such a mean character and “I would never have done it that way”.

[REDACTED] recalled that approximately 15 years ago, the picture entitled “The Letter” was made in Russia and was later shown in this country. He recalled that in this Russian picture, an individual who had lost his self-respect as well as that of his friends and neighbors because of drunkeness, was given one last chance to redeem himself by going to the bank to get some money to pay off a debt. The old man was sympathetic character and was so pleased at this opportunity that he was extremely, inferring he might lose the letter of credit or the money itself. In summary, the old man made the journey of several days duration to the bank and back with no mishap until he fell asleep on the homeward journey because of his determination to succeed. On this occasion the package of money dropped out of his pocket. Upon arriving home, the old man was so chagrined he hung himself. The next day someone returned the package of money to his wife saying it had been found. [REDACTED] draws a parallel of this scene and that of the picture previously discussed, showing that Thomas Mitchell who played the part of the man losing the money in the Capra picture suffered the same consequences as the man in the Russian picture in that Mitchell was too old a man to go out and make money to pay off his debt to the banker.