I'm not sure I understand. If I don't like a movie, why would I give it any merit? Why would I praise a movie's excellence if I didn't enjoy it? A movie's 'merit' varies from person to person. You obviously think highly of Casablanca--I don't.

I'm simply saying that I'm not going to watch a movie, and then despite my not being entertained by it, claim that it was good anyway because it was an unprecedented movie and because it was highly acclaimed when it came out. To me, that would be close-minded. I'm trying to be unbiased, disregarding what everyone says about Casablanca and considering it as I would any other movie, no matter when it was made. I'm judging this movie solely on the basis of whether or not I liked it. A movie's value relies on its impact on the viewer, doesn't it?


Well, I don't really see how I could debate you on that matter--if I did, the argument would be endless. You think my statement on classics often times being overrated is false, and you agree with Roger Ebert and his glowing review for Casablanca. *shrug* I'm just putting my two cents in on this thread, because I too don't think Casablanca is one of the greatest movies ever made, as it is claimed to be by many. But to each his own.