I haven’t been able to finish Ebert’s commentary because he falls into the habit of describing the action we’re watching and he even manages to get his facts wrong (as is his habit in his column). Every once in a while he’ll engage in a technical aspect, but nothing like the excellent work he did on Kane (probably because Casablance isn’t that kind of movie). I was particularly shocked that he didn’t mention Don Siegel’s work on the opening montages–this didn’t come up in the other commentary either.
The other extras are fine, but there’s way too much self-congratulation. I love the film and all, but it’s still a bit off-putting to have other people constantly remind me how it remains the Greatest blah-de-blah and the most Timeless some-de-dum.
Um, Michael Curtiz had over 100 films credited as director, dating back to 1912, before Casablanca started filming. He was an essential part of the Warner Bros. mode of production and had been since sound was introduced.