FrogGlace
In other words,this film is a surreal ride.
Joanna Mccarty
Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.
Kaydan Christian
A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.
OneView
Star power is perhaps less important in movies today than it was in decades past. Films are more often sold on a concept rather than a name and it is far less common for a star to have the ability to 'open' a film on their name power alone. The casting for Casablanca Express, a World War II set tale shot in Morocco and Italy demonstrates two types of name casting of the period. The first is the use of actors who had substantial careers but were perhaps past the point of being headliners themselves anymore. Glenn Ford at the age of 73 and Donald Pleasance at 70 are given substantial supporting roles that rely on their presence and the ability for their names to be used in print and related advertising. Ford had given very few acting performances in the previous decade, whilst Pleasance had been hugely busy in a large range of low budget features. The older audience would be familiar with the actors' work and be happy perhaps to see them again in a feature.The second form of name recognition used is to cast the offspring of known actors, in this case the sons of Sean Connery and Anthony Quinn, relying perhaps on curiosity value from the audience about whether they would be equivalent level stars to their parents. In this case neither has a great deal of charisma but their evident willingness to engage in complex stunt work un-doubled for the most part is impressive. The complex action sequences atop and around trains go a long way to adding to the conviction of the film.The plot is fairly perfunctory though with a non-cheat twist ending and the remote locations through which the train of the title travels are fairly evocative. Dialogue is at time unintentionally hilarious and extensive post-production dubbing appears to have occurred.I enjoyed my first viewing of Casablanca Express but did not feel it had sufficient depth or other items of interest that would support a repeat viewing.
Jakealope
Cheap Italian flicks, especially aimed at an international market, are always fun. It is like an Italian meal with some good dishes and some bad ones indifferently put together but served with panache. You know the plot by now, it is set in WW ll just before the Casablanca Conference where they have to move Prime Minister Winston Churchill there safely, in spite of a German plot to kill him. It takes advantage of the fact that Nazis had plenty of collaborators in North Africa amongst the Vichy French administration that the Allies left in charge and Arabs too. There is a secret agent trio, played by two star's sons and some pretty woman, then a couple of old heavy actors brought in as HQ high officer types. Basically it is "The Eagle Has Landed" in North Africa, right down to the German paratroopers, but told from the good guy's point of view. It is fun but nothing to take serious or go out of your way. It provides a lot of action, mainly a lot of machine gunning but little gore. It had the hijacked plot element in it, when the paratroopers took over the train full of a smörgåsbord of Europeans & North Africans. In this part of the movie, there was shameless sentimentality with a wounded girl, shot by the paras, being saved & a dying priest being ministered to by his Islamic seat mate.
tsharp1948
You'll find yourself laughing at the many historical errors and incongruities in this movie. For example: The average North African home surrounded an open court, why in the world would anyone place an anti-aircraft machine gun in the middle of a small courtyard unless he felt there was a good chance they would only be attacked by dive bombers!!! Or how about two hand painted vertical stripes on the helmet of an American captain, so oversize and off center, it's hard to miss his rank. Or how about the HUGE red cross bullseye's on the helmets of the medics. Otherwise the movie was fun but not in the way the producers ever intended.
blanche-2
This film was on a DVD with another film, "The Swiss Conspiracy," so comparisons are inevitable. I gave this a 6 because I thought it was better than "The Swiss Conspiracy." Which isn't saying much. But I actually liked this film a little better than most of the other people who commented on this board.Its stars are Jason Connery, son of Sean, and Francesco Quinn, son of Anthony, along with Glenn Ford, Donald Pleasance, Jean Sorel and Jinny Stefan. One thing that made me deeply regret watching this film was that I had never seen Glenn Ford in anything he did after Superman - until this 1989 movie. Though I give him credit for not wearing a hairpiece or getting a face lift, his appearance was an unwelcome shock.The story concerns getting Churchill to Casablanca via train. I am not the World War II expert that some of the other reviewers here are, so I can't speak to the inaccuracies. I found the action sequences, especially those concerning the train, exciting, suspenseful, and well directed. One thing that was somewhat stupid - one of the Germans goes through the train, shooting anybody in his way - we're talking men, women, or children. Then he tells his commander that one man, whose dead body the commander sees, came after him and he had to shoot in self defense. "I told you not to kill any civilians," the commander says. So much for following orders - there was hardly anyone left alive or not wounded on the entire train of civilians! As for the rest of the movie, forget it. I didn't feel that Quinn or Connery had any charisma or acting ability, though I notice that both men continue to rack up jobs. However, they are very handsome. Connery and Tyrone Power Jr. (who isn't in this) seem to come from the same Star Children Acting Academy - when they don't know what to do, they shake their heads and tighten their lips as a reaction to some event. This normally means that the camera is on them when they have no dialogue, and they think they have to do something. They do, but on film, often an internal thought that expresses itself in the eyes is better. Sometimes less is more. Of course, less can be less, too. Connery did this grimace/head business constantly, never changing expression.The film had that grainy, cheap look to it and poor color. Possibly the people in this movie have moved up to better quality projects. I don't know whether that's a good or a bad thing.
