From October 2010 to October 2011 I revisited each film from writer, director, and actor Woody Allen in preparation for 2011 – the 40th anniversary of the release of what is considered by many to be Allen’s first film, Bananas. Of course he did release a few films prior, but it was Bananas that was the first to begin the yearly string of releases that came to be known as the quintessential Woody Allen film.
Allen has for years been one of my top five favorite directors, and looking back at his long career (one film per year for 40 years) it’s really quite astounding. Sure, it’s true that most of the time Allen doesn’t branch out nearly as much as other filmmakers. But there is a particular and familiar universe that he has created and lives in 99% of the time, and it’s a style all his own, a world where he invites you into every year – to meet new characters, and the stories they have to tell.
My reviewing skills are admittedly not very strong, and the famous quote from Truman Capote – “it isn’t writing at all – it’s typing” – is never more prevalent than with these short reviews, but none the less this was very fun for me to revisit all these movies again over the past months – and exciting to share at least a few of my basic thoughts to the world (ha!) on one of my top five favorite filmmakers. The timing couldn’t be more fitting as well not only because of the 40th anniversary of Bananas, but because that year saw the release, surprisingly enough, of Allen’s biggest financial success in the United States – Midnight in Paris. These are in order of release, beginning with 1971’s Bananas and ending with 2011’s Midnight in Paris.
Be sure to also click on the posters for each film's trailer!
Although there were a couple movies that came prior to this, I start with Bananas as to me it was the official start of the “fully realized” and quintessential Allen cinematic experience. This was in his prime when it came to slapstick comedy – and even though there is a plot and basic outline, it’s clear this film started out as a series of sketches that ended up having to be tied together with some sort of story. That story – and I say that loosely – revolves around Allen finding himself reluctantly leading a rebel movement against the dictatorship of the tiny fictional Caribbean nation of San Marcos, and soon becomes that nation’s new president. But that’s all you need to know, as the pure intention here is slapstick humor – and it succeeds wildly. The first 15 minutes are classic self-deprecating Allen, including a run in on the subway with Sylvester Stallone, and it’s only uphill from there. (1971) A-
This is one of less than a handful of movies Woody Allen was heavily involved in but did not direct, but he did write the screenplay based on his own Broadway play of the same name. He is also the lead actor, so, it counts in my book. Allen plays, well, Allan, a San Franciscan who has gone through another divorce, and with the help of his friends (played by Diane Keaton and Tony Roberts) he decides to hit the dating scene again. Despite trying to keep up appearances, things don’t always go so well, with Allen’s usual hilarious slapstick comedy accenting his dating troubles. Meanwhile, because of his obsession with the film Casablanca, the ghost of Humphrey Bogart keeps appearing with “advice” – and that Casablanca theme runs strong throughout the movie. This is a very fun imaginative film, mixed with Allen’s overall ridiculousness (which is a compliment of the highest order), and the supporting performance from Tony Roberts who is always fantastic in every Allen film he appears in. On top of that, I can’t think of a movie where Diane Keaton looked any more beautiful than in this. A fun, hilarious movie that I can’t recommend enough. (1972) B+
What was meant to be a funny movie inspired by a popular book of the same name that came out in the 1960’s, this one unfortunately to me was outweighed by just plain disturbing moments. The style of the film is series of skits – or chapters – each bringing to life questions raised in the books. Certain skits are inspired, like Why Do Some Women Have Trouble Reaching an Orgasm?, which is shot in the style of Italian film-making from the 60’s; What Are Sex Perverts? which is a game show in which panelists (including Regis Philbin) attempt to guess a contestant’s perversion; and What Happens During Ejaculation?, in which Woody plays a sperm inside a male who, amongst all the other sperm, are controlled by the men in the brain, played by Tony Randall and Burt Reynolds. Funny and clever stuff, but for me there are two segments portraying incredibly creepy male characters that overpowers what good is in this film. One involves the wonderful, late Gene Wilder as a doctor who ends up being involved romantically with a sheep, and the other about an older man who likes to dress up in women’s clothes. It’s probably just me, as I can see how people would find those segments funny, but there is just this dark creepiness to it that steers me away from this movie every time I glance at it on the shelf. It’s not a bad movie, it’s actually quite well made and it was a big hit when it came out, so it’s probably just me, but this is my blog damn it! HA! (1972) C
This one is brilliant, especially when compared to Allen’s other films, because it is probably his most effective film. I say that because (and I am not sure if this one bothers others as it does me) it’s vision of the future is so bleak, sterile and clinical that it’s incredibly depressing to watch (even though the budget at times leaves a lot to be desired). It makes the story much more “believable” of course, which is why it’s effective for me, but I rarely look forward to watching this movie. Which is a strange thing to say, because this is also one of his funniest and well made. The story is simple. Miles Monroe (Allen) is awoken after 200 years of being cryogenically frozen, finding himself in a world (the year 2173 to be exact) that looks like a giant Apple store, with a dash of totalitarianism. Miles ends up befriending Luna (Diane Keaton) and together they dive into an adventure trying to stop some nonsensical “Aires Project”. Anyway, this movie is pure slapstick and Allen is at his best in this one. It’s one scene after another filled with his perfectly over-the-top physical comedy and top notch one-liners, and much of it to the tune of his big band Preservation Hall Jazz Band which he even still plays with to this very day (see Wild Man Blues). I hope not to sway anyone away with the bleak future talk – it’s probably just me who feels slightly disturbed by it – as this is a very fun and very very funny movie. (1973) A
Thus far in Allen’s filmography he’s taken us to a Caribbean dictatorship, San Francisco, the year 2173, and into the brain of a man during sex. In Love and Death, Allen’s last stop in his early more “experimental” phase before more or less ending up in his hometown New York, is Russia in the 1800’s. The plot involves the solider Boris (Allen), who along with his distant cousin & wife Sonja (Diane Keaton) – when not engaging in endless philosophical debates – plot to assassinate Napoleon. Basically it’s just a new setting in which to house Allen’s modern and comedically out of time jokes and physical slapstick, but the juxtaposition continues to work brilliantly and this is a very funny movie. And of course if you don’t find it funny, the soundtrack of the film will help the time pass, it consisting mostly of ‘Troika’, the 4th movement from Segei Prokofiev’s Lieutenant Kijé, which is insanely fantastic. This one is absurd, pure lunacy, and it’s grand in scale in both production and humor, and luckily Allen’s last purely silly films is a high note. Can he possibly top it with Annie Hall? Time will tell! (1975) B+
I generally don’t 100% agree with the general consensus by people when they talk about any director’s best work, but with Woody Allen I do. This movie is pure perfection. I mean, when is the last time a comedy won for Best Picture at the Academy Awards? Ok, it was Annie Hall in 1977. Allen’s observations on falling in and out of love, his observations on types of people he and everyone encounter every day, his ease of blending his one-liner style of stand up comedy and hilariously surreal vignettes (a more progressed version of what Allen did in ‘Everything You Always Wanted…‘) into a linear plot line; it’s a recipe for greatness. Annie Hall is a hilarious film with outstanding performances from Diane Keaton and Allen, and unlike some of Allen’s other work, it’s brilliance that appeals to the masses on a grand scale – there’s something for everyone to relate to. I can”t recommend this movie enough. La di da indeed. (1977) A+
Oh yes, this one, Woody’s first foray into drama, and of the few dramatic films he made this is the most intense of them. But a quiet intensity, a slow moving film that teeters back and forth on the fence between nearly exploding into utter sadness and devastating events, or just complete boredom. The story involves three sisters who are coping with what they perceive as their sad lives, and the separation of their father and mother, the latter of which is having emotional problems so severe she at one time was admitted into a psych ward and given electroshock therapy. So yes, this is a doozy indeed. The performances are quite good, including Geraldine Page who deserves the Oscar nomination in her portrayal of the mother, Eve, and the art direction is also fantastic with it’s cold, chilly desolate sets, colors and scenery right from the opening shot. But as good as so many elements are, something just isn’t quite right. To me it doesn’t feel natural. The plot, the script, it all feels like it did not originate from a place of inspiration personally, but more of an artistic inspiration, to the point of being a mere imitation. When some compare this to much of Ingmar Bergman’s work, it makes you think if this was dubbed in Swedish you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. It makes sense as well, since at one point Allen said of Bergman “(he’s) probably the greatest film artist, all things considered, since the invention of the motion picture camera”. Interiors is admirable in it’s execution, but it’s inspiration feels as cold as the world these characters are living in, and for that it’s hard for me to feel certain in any sort of opinion. It’s all just kind of “there”, going through it’s motions. Not a good film, not a bad film, just an admirable experiment. Save this one for last. (1978) C
This one starts off with one one of greatest opening sequences of pretty much any film, a beautiful montage of black & white shots of Manhattan to a soundtrack of George Gershwin’s ‘Rhapsody in Blue’. It’s quite touching actually in the most joyous way, an obvious love letter of sorts from Allen to his hometown, and seeing shots of New York City in the 70’s – it’s quite classic today. Even the most ardent New York hater would have to fall head over heels for the city after seeing that sequence. The mood is sort of out of place though when compared to the rest of the film. The story revolves around Isaac (Allen) whose ex-wife (the young and always fantastic Meryl Streep) is writing a book about their past marriage while at the same time he is carrying on a relationship with 17 year old Tracy (Mariel Hemingway – who does a great job with the role) – the latter of which was based on Allen’s real life relationship with Stacey Nelkin who was also 17 at the time of their relationship. Then Mary (Diane Keaton) shows up, and despite getting off on the wrong foot – Isaac falls for her, thus relationships end and new ones begin – with all the good and bad that comes along with it. Some truly incredible beautiful and iconic shots along with the reliable hilarious lines from Allen’s script more than makes up for the awkward Isaac & Tracy scenes and plotline. It is a movie you really do not want to miss, and I highly recommend it, but for me something is missing, a bit of a bite or an edge. It was written by Allen and Marshall Brickman who co-wrote Annie Hall together just two years earlier (and later on the fantastic Manhattan Murder Mystery), and to me it was them trying to recreate that Oscar-winning magic, and despite coming close, there is a void. (1979) B
Beautifully shot, but ultimately a cold wind blows across this one from beginning to end. The story revolves around film director Sandy Bates and the celebrity status and worship that accompanies his success reaching a boiling point to the point he questions the validity of his accomplishments. Some funny lines and undeniably beautiful imagery, but in the end it can’t make up for the lack of focus and inconsistent casting choices. There is definitely appreciation by many in critics circles for this one – but I always felt it was one of his more sub-par movies. (1980) C
For me the key to this movie is it’s atmosphere – which is something generally not prevalent in Woody’s movies. Badminton, lemonade, sex, humidity, fireflies, parasols, ‘the hissing of summer lawns’ if you will. It’s all front and center in this WHIMSICAL comedy – one of my favorites from Allen. Here he plays an early 1900’s crackpot inventor who along with his wife invite a few couples out to the countryside for a summer’s weekend. As the hours pass, romantic entanglements become intertwined as the summer hours drone on and on. There’s not a whole lot to say about this movie, as it’s a very light comedy, with nothing to say as it just breezes by. But that’s what makes it so lovely. Isn’t that what people want in the summer? A time to relax and to soak in the weather and the peace & quiet. This movie, and it’s cast, captures that sentiment perfectly. Perfection. (1982) A+
It’s quite interesting to me when I look up the box office numbers on this movie and see that it made upon its release in 1983 today’s equivalent of about $26 million. It just seems unfathomable to me that such a film could even be released, never mind making a fair amount of cash. Just goes to show how popular Woody Allen was back in the day that something like this could even do relatively well. It’s great it did because it’s such a unique film, and a great one at that. Zelig is a “mockumentary” about fictional character Leonard Zelig, played by Allen, who is the world’s first human chameleon – able to transform his appearance to that of anyone who surrounds him. The film takes place in the 1920’s and thus it’s filmed in the style of newsreels from that time, which helps convey the fact that Zelig became a celebrity due to his unique ability. With the use of bluescreen technology, they convincingly have Zelig hanging out with Calvin Coolidge, Adolf Hitler, Charles Lindbergh, Babe Ruth and Josephine Baker, just to name a few. Zelig is 28 years old now and the effects are still incredibly impressive. In fact if one didn’t know who Woody or Mia Farrow (who plays a doctor researching his “condition”) were, I could see one being possibly fooled by the effects, although probably not by the story. I haven’t seen this movie too many times, as it’s more of an amusement than a great movie with great performances, but it is definitely worth seeing for its unique story and style. (1983) B
This one is propelled to greatness by fantastic comedic performances by Woody Allen and Mia Farrow – playing against type as much as they can in an Allen film (especially when you ARE Woody Allen). He plays a very Italian talent agent (mixed with his neurotic Jewish side), Danny Rose, who tries to reconcile one of his top clients with his mistress (Farrow), only to be mistakenly seen as her lover, which upsets certain members of the Italian community he lives in. The type of characters Allen and Farrow portray in this film might be perceived on paper to be annoying and a disaster waiting to happen, but they play their characters beautifully and it only continues the great chemistry they had on the silver screen during the 80’s. Shot in lovely black & white and showcasing New York again as it was in the slightly grungier 1980’s, this is fun one to watch. Not one of his best, but great all the while. (1984) B+
Any movies that are itself a celebration of cinema just hits a real soft spot with me. Mia Farrow plays Cecilia, a woman unhappy in her marriage with her cheating, abusing husband (played by Danny Aiello) and unhappy with where the effects of the Great Depression have led her in life. So to escape the doldrums of her current day-to-day, she goes to the cinema for every new release to get lost in that week’s fantasy. After seeing The Purple Rose of Cairo a few times, her unspoken wishes come true when the lead character on screen (Jeff Daniels) breaks the barrier with real life and jumps out of the screen – bringing himself into Cecilia’s world and helping her escape her real life on a whole different level. Meanwhile back at the theater, the remaning cast members sit around on screen waiting for the return of their lead, and the theater patrons & management are up in arms as to what to do. This is one of those movies where only one word can sum it up: “charming”. Fun movie and one of Allen’s most unique. (1985) A-
A fine cast that includes Allen, Michael Caine, Mia Farrow, Max von Sydow and the always fantastic Dianne Wiest rounds out this story about a group of family and friends (specifically, Hannah – and her sisters) and their intertwined searches for love – past and present. Similar in style to other Allen films that see-saw between drama and comedy – this one also adds more of a romantic vibe to it, which itself see saws between nauseating and fantastic. Ultimately it’s a good film, but not his greatest (despite this being one of Allen’s bigger box office successes). Luckily the splashes of comedy help, and specifically (and coming from one who thinks sneezing means impending death) it’s very funny to see my own health worries played out through Allen’s (surprise!) neurotic hypochondriac character, Mickey Sachs. (1986) B
This is one of the few, if not only comedy of Allen’s that doesn’t need to venture into near slapstick territory to be really fun to watch. While still changing the names of the characters, this is very clearly one of Allen’s most autobiographical, depicting the early teen years of his childhood in the days when families gathered around the radio in its golden age instead of the televisions and computers of today. The cast is fantastic, including of course Mia Farrow (wow – that accent!), and then the charming Dianne Wiest, Julie Kavner, Wallace Shawn and one of the first roles from Seth Green, who plays Joe – the Allen character. They all fill this insanely nostalgic film with perfect comedic performances next to its beautiful art direction (Oscar nod), which in my view makes this an instant classic on par with A Christmas Story. Of course it isn’t a seasonal classic, but the quality is right up there, if not better. It’s hard to beat funny sequences including a segment depicting one’s reaction to The War of the Worlds radio drama that confused so many listeners, and the opening segment when a radio show calls a home and the phone is answered by burglars who have just broken into it. Essentially the film is a series of comedic vignettes about those unique days of radio, but they are sewn together perfectly under the guise of Allen. Highly recommended. And keep an eye out for Larry David who plays a very small part in one of his few roles in an Allen movie. Just listen for the yelling, if you watch Curb Your Enthusiasm, you can’t miss it. (1987) A
Ahhh yes, this one. September. I think this one has fallen through the cracks for so many reasons. Primarily I think because it’s a drama but as it runs it’s course it simply doesn’t have much to say. It has a small plot of course, but it doesn’t take the viewer on much of a ride or a journey at all, and by the end (and thankfully it’s only 80 minutes long) it feels mostly like an empty vessel. Even the poster you see above seems to convey something quite severe, a dramatic, profound and sad event in a woman’s life, but it’s misleading. Nothing really happens. “Having said that”, despite taking place entirely in one Vermont summer-house, the movie conveys wonderfully through its lighting and sound a warm summer evening, which itself creates half the atmosphere this film needs. And perhaps its the dialogue, or the cinematography, but this movie doesn’t just feel like an adaptation of a play, but it feels like you’re seeing a play that has been filmed right in the theater. Supposedly this was Woody’s intention with this, so job well done! The screenplay is obviously written for the stage through and through, and that is another plus in the few charms it has. And of course it being practically a play, it showcases some great actors and performances, especially the wonderful Elaine Stritch who has done a lot of stage work in her career. Maybe it’s just me, but I just find her charming in anything I’ve seen her in. Dianne Wiest is also fantastic, and nice to see her doing a full on dramatic role in one of Allen’s films, not just semi-dramatic or comedic. Overall this isn’t a good film, or a bad film, it’s just sort of there, sitting quietly and content with itself in Woody’s back catalog. Worth seeing for its own uniqueness, but save it as one of your last. (1987) C
It’s hard to go wrong when a movie has Martha Plimpton in it, and uses the beautiful composition 3 Gymnopedies : Gymnopedie No 1 (written by Erik Satie), but this film did have to make Allen devotees worry a bit upon its release. Not because of its quality, but because it was his second drama in a row – when he had only made 3 dramas total of the 20 films he had released at that time. Luckily it’s a good film, yet one of his least remembered movies, despite a great performance from Gina Rowlands about a woman going through a mid-life crisis. She ends up finding ways to work through it, guided by her overhearing the psychiatrist who lives next door helping another woman going through her own crisis – who that threatens her life. It’s not as heavy as it sounds, and unlike many dramas, Allen knows to keep it short. Clocking in at 80 minutes, it’s the perfect amount of time to show a glimpse into this woman’s life – and is a strong element to what makes this movie a success. (1988) B
Allen wrote, directed and starred in the final segment of this collection of shorts by New York’s most famous filmakers. The other directors were Martin Scorcese and Francis Ford Coppola (who co-wrote his segment with his daughter and future director Sofia Coppola). It’s a fluffy bit of cinema, but clever and cute all the same, especially the performance by Mae Questel. She plays the mother of Allen’s character, Sheldon, and an overbearing one at that. When she disappears during a magic act at a performance he and his fiance (Mia Farrow) takes her to, Sheldon thinks his worries have disappeared, but she returns in the grandest, most over-bearing fashion imaginable. What at first seems to be a situation that is simply too much to take, Sheldon soon comes to realize he not only misses his mother, but she is a bigger and more positive influence in his life than he ever realized. Trademark Allen – funny and light all the same. (1989) B
Once in a while Allen doesn’t seem to be able to make up his mind what his next film should be, a comedy or a drama. So why not do both? That’s exactly what he decided to do in this interesting little film. The drama side revolves around Dr Judah Rosenthal (Martin Landau) whose mistress (Angelica Huston) is trying to reveal their affair to his wife. It leads to Rosenthal taking very selfish and ghastly actions, which only leads to different and terrible levels of guilt he hadn’t thought about beforehand. On the comedic side, Cliff (Allen) has been hired by his big time TV producer brother-in-law (Alan Alda), whom he despises, to make a documentary about him. While in production me meets Halley (Mia Farrow) and falls for her instantly. Cliff is of course now cheating on his wife in hopes that a future with Halley is in the cards, but she may not be entirely ready or even interested. Both stories are convincingly portrayed, and having the very heavy-handed story of Rosenthal broken up with the light-hearted Cliff story makes it much more tolerable. Makes you wonder if Allen had done the same with Interiors and September then they might have also been more enjoyable – as when he does drama, it is drama in the truest sense of the word. Either way this is a rewarding move to watch – just be prepared for a total night and day experience. (1989) B+
This is another one of Allen’s “breezy” and “whimsical” movies, the type that are always good to watch no matter what mood you are in. Alice, played by Mia Farrow, is an upper class stay-at-home Mom who gradually realizes she is looking for something new in her life, be it a new love or simply a more meaningful existence. With the aid of some ancient herbs from a mystical Chinese acupuncturist (with “side effects” like her inner flirt coming out, becoming invisible, and see ghosts from the past), Alice sees a clearer picture of her life and the direction it needs to lead. Farrow is fantastic and charming as always, and helps this feel like one of Allen’s most complete (yet, least remembered) films. (1990) B+
This is one of my absolute favorite of Allen’s films. Sadly it’s one that was overlooked at the time of its release and thus it’s now a bit of a forgotten gem. Beautifully shot in black and white, it appears to take place somewhere in Germany or eastern Europe in the early 1900’s. The main plot revolves a group of vigilantes who have taken to the street to hunt down ‘The Strangler’ who has been killing off locals – and Kleinman (Allen), who is reluctantly drawn into the hunt. That Allen is able to take such elements as black & white cinematography, eastern Europe and murder so funny and enjoyable is quite a credit to his comedic talent. He balances the dire surroundings with his usual one-liners and physical comedy, and the cast is fantastic. Kathy Bates, John Cusack, Mia Farrow, Jodie Foster, Julike Kavner, Madonna, John Malkovich, Donald Pleasance, Wallace Shawn, David Ogden Stiers, Lily Tomlin and others. It’s probably just me, but the mix of atmosphere, Allen’s humor and this cast, it’s fantastic from beginning to end. (1991) A
Allen is in fine form here, and I am not sure why I find a movie about divorce, break-ups, infidelity and the like so comforting, but I have seen this movie at least 50 times and it gets better and more enjoyable every time I see it. It ages gracefully I suppose. I think because this was written and filmed right before Allen’s personal and public “troubles” (and subsequently released at the time it went public) – he had a lot of inspiration that hit home and just gave this movie a very real and natural feel to it. It’s not a preachy film with its subject matter (like so many of slightly similar movies can turn into in the wrong hands), but simply – and I’m sure due to the hand-held camera style it’s filmed in (another level of freshness to this film) – it’s basically a documentary. But it’s a warm film. The characters all feel real – even Allen cuts down on his slapstick-y paranoia to play an everyday New Yorker – and the cinematography & production design is just gorgeous – with Autumn reds, browns and rain-swept streets highlighted predominantly. On top of it all you have the performances. First, highly underrated actress Judy Davis has one of the best performances I’ve seen in any movie (not just an Allen movie), and Juliette Lewis who for some reason just never gets the recognition she deserves for this movie when people speak of her filmography. Add the wonderful and departed Sydney Pollack, and Mia Farrow, then round it off with Liam Neeson and Allen, this is just – dare I say it – brilliant! Perfection. Oh – and what is about? It’s about husbands and wives. (1992) A+
For this film it was a reunion of sorts, and at the same time a bit of a fresh start. After Allen’s personal troubles became public, he decided to take it light for his next film, and to do that he teamed up for the first time since Annie Hall with his co-star from that film (and real life ex-girlfriend) Diane Keaton. Also back in the fold was the co-writer of Annie Hall (Allen rarely has co-writers), Marshall Brickman, who worked as co-writer on this film as well. This lovely piece of celluloid is a perfect gem, and in this fan’s eyes – one of his best. As for the story, well, the title sums it up nice and simply – it’s a murder mystery that takes place in Manhattan. When Larry (Allen) and Carol’s (Keaton) neighbor passes away, wild ideas are floated about as to what happened, but when Keaton becomes an on-the-fly PI – it turns out the theories of her and her friend Ted (Alan Alda) may not be so crazy after all. I have seen this one more than any other of Allen’s films, so we are probably talking about 70 times I would guess at this point. Yes, I’ve spent 140 hours of my life watching this movie over and over again – and it’s still not enough and it never gets stale at all. Every location is charming and beautiful. Every note of music is perfectly chosen. Every performance is spot on. The chemistry between Allen and Keaton is superb. The chance to see Anjelica Huston in a comedic role is refreshing. As well, Allen may not get many accolades for his acting chops, but he nails this role perfectly. It’s hard to get lost in any Allen performance – it’s always apparent you are watching Woody Allen – but he steps out of his shell a bit for this one and puts in a hilarious role. Apparently something about his personal troubles helped him put out two of his best works, back to back, as this one is breezy, it’s whimsical, it’s really really funny, and its even tense at times. And if you’re a sucker for Allen’s one-liners, delivered with his physical brand of comedy – you’re in for a treat here. And is that Joy Behar, and Zach Braff? WEIRD! Perfect for any occasion, this movie is pure comfort food. Very HIGHLY recommended. (1993) A+
Anchored by two fantastic performances by Dianne Wiest and Jennifer Tilly, and not to mention probably the strongest supporting ensembles in any of Allen’s films, this is another entry into what was a decade straight of fantastic entries into his filmography. This one revoles around struggling playwright David Shayne (John Cusack) who has been given the opportunity by his manager to bring his newest play to Broadway. He even has the Norma Desmond-inspired Helen Sinclair (Wiest) on board for her big comeback. The only hitch? This opportunity is fully financed by a big time mobster who requires his airhead girlfriend (Tilly) take the lead. Of course David is not having it and chaos ensues. This is a very funny movie, specifically because of the performances, and frankly it’s pretty difficult to take one’s eyes off the screen whenever Dianne Wiest is on. She completely transforms herself and it’s a simply fantastic (and ultimately a much deserved award-winning) performance. Then you’ve got Tracy Ullman, Harvey Fierstein and goodness is that Mary-Louise Parker? She’s no Nancy Botwin here. This is one of those movies where it’s hard to understand why awards for casting are not given out. Very fun, very very funny and highly recommended – of course. (1994) A
Originally a play written by Allen that debuted on Broadway in 1966, it was turned into a film just 3 years after it’s publication with Jackie Gleason in the lead. The results were poor – as seen no more strongly than in the eyes of Allen himself. So 25 years later Allen decided to get the film done right under his direction, this time as a TV movie for ABC and using his usual production crew (DP Carlos diPalma, production designer Santo Loquasto, etc). The plot is simple – Walter Hollander (Allen) and his family somehow end up behind the Iron Curtain for vacation and end up having to seek asylum in the US Embassy, one that is filled with a cast of characters bumbling through the job after the departure of the current ambassador, leaving his son (Michael J. Fox) in charge of the embassy. What sounds like a project that didn’t have much going for it turned out to be one of Allen’s best, specifically because of the hilarious script and fantastic great comedic performances of Allen, Fox, and Julie Kavner. Even Mayim Bialik does a decent job as the Hollander’s recently engaged daughter who falls for the newly minted ambassador during their stay. This is just a really fun screwball comedy, and again if you find Allen’s neurosis and style of one-liners, this is Allen in finest form in all his over-the-top glory. Highly recommended. (1994) A
For some reason I get the feeling this, one of Allen’s best, is being forgotten with time, and I can’t really figure out why. Anchored by a fantastic, hilarious and award-winning performance from Mira Sorvino, this is a really fun movie about Lenny (Allen) who adopted a child with this wife (Helena Bonham Carter), and then becomes curious in finding out who the child’s birth mother is. This leads him to the quirky, charming albeit dim porn star/prostitute Linda Ash (Sorvino), to whom Allen becomes determined to help turn her life around. The story is narrated by a Greek chorus who appears and disappears at various moments throughout, tying the plot up with the story of Oedipus. There’s something very comforting about this movie to me, maybe because it seems to balance out all the different forms of comedy Allen does, instead of just focusing on one style. Mighty Aphrodite is a prime example of Allen at this best, especially scenes between him and Sorvino which are just fantastic (their first encounter has me in tears each time from laughing). Michael Rapaport is fantastic as well I should add. I can’t recommend this one enough. (1995) A
With an open mind, you could find this movie to be incredibly fun. When I first saw it, I did enjoy it, but I don’t think I appreciated the way it deserves to be. I’m not really sure of what decade this is influenced by, but its a musical in the style of films from somewhere between the 1930’s and 1950’s. The fun twist is that all the musical sequences are sung by the actors, none of which are trained vocalists in any manner. So that’s funny, you see? HA! The plot basically involves some various romances amongst a rich extended Manhattan family of self-proclaimed liberal Democrats. The extended part of the family includes Joe (Allen), the ex-husband of Steffi (Goldie Hawn), who travels to Venice for the summer with his daughter DJ (Natasha Lyone) and falls, with DJ’s assistance, into a relationship with Von (Julia Roberts). Other romances include the on-the-rocks engagement between characters played by Edward Norton and Drew Barrymore, a teen crush between Natalie Portman and a local neighbor, and of course the marriage between Hawn and Alan Alda. Everything here is just pitch perfect (other than the singing of course). From the sets, the scenery of Venice, Paris and New York, the casting, even the costuming is spot on somehow. It’s a bright, colorful, cheery and fun movie, and is one of his very few that I like to say is breezy from beginning to end. And something about the ending, where an ex-husband and ex-wife can still share wonderful moments together as friends and parents, including what I would say is the best shot of any of his films with Allen dancing with a flying Goldie Hawn under a moonlit Paris night – just very charming and beautiful stuff. It’s all quite refreshing really, and proof that this movie is indeed a fantasy from another time on many many levels. (1996) A-
This is without a doubt one of Allen’s best films. Feeling like a whole new, fresh, revived and inspired Woody Allen, this one is beautifully shot, cleverly edited, very funny, and just works so well as Allen decided clearly to push himself outside the box a bit, and because of that it feels very inspired from beginning to end. The story revolves around Harry Block (played by Allen) whose life is a bit in disarray, and in no uncertain terms is seeing aspects of his persona played out via dramatizations of his various short stories. The cast is huge and hilarious, including seeing Kirstie Alley finally show the comic chops she showed back on her days on Cheers, and Mariel Hemingway – who years earlier was Allen’s co-star in Manhattan. And to top it all off – it all still feels like quintessential Allen. I’ve seen this one dozens of times and it never gets old. It’s a complex, but somehow a very cozy and comfy film, and Allen continues to make New York City look and sound like a place I wish I could love. (1997) A+
I’m not fully sure why after seeing this movie again after many years that I enjoyed it so much more – maybe it’s just one of those situations where the subject at hand gets better with age. When I initially saw it in the theater I was terribly annoyed with Kenneth Branagh playing the part that Allen would usually plays by doing a near complete impersonation, but now I found it quite fun and enjoyable. Maybe it’s simply the filling of the gap from the past few years where Allen hasn’t appeared in most of his films. Maybe also now that time has passed and the film’s s process of becoming more of an older film has progressed, it becomes all the more apparent the classic feel that a beautifully shot black & white film can bring to a movie. Watching this has been the greatest of surprises as I wasn’t looking forward to this one nearly as much, and as it turns out I’ve a new-found appreciation and thus I do recommend checking it out. An ageless Charlize Theron, an un-seasoned Leonardo DiCaprio, the consistently fantastic Judy Davis, then Winona Ryder, Melanie Griffith, and countless others all round out this take on modern-day celebrity, intertwined with the ups and downs of modern-day romances of course – this is Woody Allen after all. Lovely … surprisingly. (1998) B
This movie has always felt to me like a wonderful and harmless little showcase. Not just for the wonderful performances by Sean Penn and Samantha Morton – both well-deserving of their Oscar nominations, but of all the wonderful jazz music that is at the forefront of the story. Penn portrays fictional jazz guitarist Emmet Ray, who is “the second greatest jazz guitarist of his time, right behind Django Reinhardt” … well according to him that is the case. He is talented with the guitar neck, but he’s just as talented with the bottleneck – and because of that, real potential greatness that is within arm’s reach is simply too far away to grasp. In the meantime, the story is a pleasant observation on the life of Emmet, especially once he meets Hattie (Morton), a mute woman with whom he becomes involved in a relationship. More than the chemistry they do have on-screen, hers is truly a fantastic performance, especially considering she doesn’t utter a word through the entire film. Sweet and Lowdown is a nice story, with great production design, music and performances, but there is just something missing which I still can’t pinpoint. There’s not much humor, nor is their much drama. It’s all a bit directionless, which is nice at times, but when all the elements in this are so grand – when it’s lacking a strong direction – it just feels unfinished. A shame, as this could have been one of his best. Oh, and John Waters is in it! (1999) B-
This is one of my favorite films by Allen as it contains all the elements that makes his movies classic. It’s a breezy screwball comedy with a fun script and a fantastic cast of comedians who are clearly having a great time making the film. Can you ever go wrong with Tracy Ullman, Michael Rapaport, Jon Lovitz, the amazing Elaine May, and Woody Allen at this neurotic best? Oh and the plot? It’s about a group of bumbling con artists who in the middle of a new get rich quick scheme, find themselves getting rich quick in a whole different manner – running a mega corporation making cookies. Hilarity ensues. Can’t recommend this one enough. (2000) A
This movie is insufferable. It’s not a complete wreck – only because in this biased Allen fan’s eyes his mere presence is enough, as he is funny as always. However, with this one it couldn’t be more clear Allen was able to get movies green-lit because of his tremendous track record, and not on a case by case basis. Allen plays an insurance investigator in the year 1940, who finds himself hypnotized by a criminal magician – getting him to steal various jewels. When not hypnotized he is back at his job and investigating the very crimes he unknowingly committed. There are other plot points going on, but it doesn’t really matter all that much. There is just something very very off about this movie that I can’t pinpoint. One that I can, which I think is what kills any chance that this movie had, is its casting. Dan Aykroyd is skin-crawlingly bad in this, one of the worst performances I have seen in any movie. Why he wasn’t fired and replaced when Allen saw the dailies I have no idea, but maybe he just knew this movie had no hope and wanted to just get it done with. Also Helen Hunt – who I am not a fan of to begin with, is piss-poor, completely robotic and just awful. A good match for Aykroyd I guess. Nauseating. I suppose it’s not all bad, Allen IS funny, the 40’s production design is good and it does have Wallace Shawn and Charlize Theron. It might be worth seeing for a laugh (at it, of course), but I would wait until you see ALL his other films first before seeing this. It’s no Plan 9 From Outer Space, but in the Allen universe, this one is lost in space. POW! (2001) D-
Smack dab in the middle of the string of 3 lackluster films Allen made in the early 00’s, this is probably the best of the three. It still has its cringe-inducing moments where Allen – in his late 70’s – somehow has a magnetism that draws young beautiful women to his side, but one may feel better watching it thinking the absurdity of it all is purposefully written for comedic effect. Due to Allen’s all too public personal life, it’s hard to think that is actually the case. Regardless, and as uninspired and awkward this movie is (and its poor casting: George Hamilton, Treat Williams and Tiffani Amber Thiessen? Really?), Allen’s performance at least draws a fair amount of laughs from his physical comedy – one’s that hardcore Allen devotees will find enough to give this a passing grade. As a writer and filmmaker of Allen’s caliber, this is one of his few that are best saved for last. (2002) D+
By the time this film came and went, one had to think that Allen may have “finally” lost it completely. To put it nicely – it’s a complete mess. First, look at that poster. It tells you everything you need to know, which is they had to resort to desperate marketing to try to get anyone to his movie – including Allen fans. Those fans were I believe quite worried when they saw the casting. Some are good in their own right (Stockard Channing, Christina Ricci), but together – with the likes of Jason Biggs and Jimmy Fallon?! This is the only movie that Allen made where it felt like he was trying to copy himself. Nothing about it feels “naturally Allen”. The writing, the acting, everything is trying to live in Woody Allen’s world – but they aren’t even in the tri-state area. Maybe the one redeeming quality is Allen playing a slightly militant character – which is so against his nature that it’s amusing to watch – but it’s too little too late. Christina Ricci is pretty cute – that’s something! (2003) D
This is one of those movies from Allen during a period of what I found to be unfinished products. It’s in the vain of Crimes and Misdemeanors, with half the movie being a drama, the other half being a comedy. But unlike that movie (which had two different stories), this is one story of a slightly emotionally unstable woman looking for real love, trust and stability in her life being told twice – once as a drama, and once as comedy. It plays well in parts, but suffers from some sub-par casting choices, and even the good ones – while doing their best with the material – seem to be lacking direction. It’s not a terrible movie by any means, it has funny moments and good performances (Radha Mitchell, Chloë Sevigny and even despite instinctively trying to do a Woody Allen impression, Will Ferrell is funny), but it’s aching for one final script re-write, and one more round of auditions. Amanda Peet, really? But thank you for Steve Carrell – that always helps. (2004) C+
Woody Allen. Tennis. Scarlet Johansson. I personally couldn’t ask for a better combination, and luckily it turned out quiet well, with Allen making a complete turnaround after his last few semi-duds. Sure this movie has some over-the-top performance moments, especially from Jonathan Rhys-Meyers as an aspiring English socialite, but at the same time he is perfectly cast for the role. If his performance is intended or not, it’s hard to tell, but it’s cringe-inducing… and perfect. Oh, and did I mention Scarlett Johansson? Some of her scenes could have been written and directed by Allen with a bit less camp, but when the material is right, she shines. This film succeeds when placed in the context of the Woody Allen universe, basically because he’s ventured into new territory. He’s now based his movie in England instead of his New York home, and similar to when he started dabbling in dramas, he’s now trying out “thrillers” – although I say that lightly. It’s hard for me to judge this movie as a stand-alone entry in the world of cinema, but in Allen’s universe, it’s a refreshing change of pace, and done brilliantly. (2005) A-
This is one of my favorite of Allen’s comedies as it’s a celluloid version of comfort food. You can sit down and watch it with full attention at any time and it’s a great experience, or you can put it on in the background and it’s nice to have it there, keeping you company. It was a nice change afterMatch Point‘s over-the-top seriousness, and to see Scarlett Johansson’s comedic chops just a year later, it has become clear to me after repeated viewing of both that film and this one that this performance is the better of the two. Her top quality to me is to take on the role by not acting like “how you’re supposed to act in an Allen film”, but to make it all your own, and she does just that. There’s no real need to go into the plot, as it’s not as important as the light-hearted mood of the film, but basically it’s about murder and magic. The key to the film’s success is the interaction between Allen’s and Ms Johansson’s characters, including Allen’s still hilarious skill of physical comedy and one-liners. If that alone is enough to make a movie pure gold, then you will be in heaven with this one, but just add in Johansson’s bubbly enthusiastic naivety (her character, I refer to) and you’ve got a brilliant new comedic team. This isn’t the best review as it’s not the easiest film to explain why I love it so much, but I guess that’s the nature of comfort food. (2006) A
Allen’s third film in a row to take place in England intends to be a brutal thriller, but instead it unfortunately comes across more like a cut-rate mid-afternoon Agatha Christie made for TV movie. The plot involves two brothers, Ian and Terry (McGregor and Farrell) who are in serious debt due to Terry’s gambling problems. They turn to their wealthy uncle Howard (Tom Wilkinson – the film’s one genuinely good performance – albeit brief) for help. He agrees – but only if Ian and Terry are willing to murder someone who is causing Howard trouble of his own. They in turn agree and perform the task without getting caught, but Terry’s overwhelming guilt begins a spiral for both the brothers that threatens their plan and their lives. There are actually many good elements to this film – possibly because it is a classic old story – but the execution by Allen is just weak here. It feels rushed, it feels like its going through the motions, and only three films in and it already feels like the English setting has somehow gone stale. And not to mention most of the performances in this which practically feel phoned in. It’s no fault of the actors necessarily, Allen is known to film scenes in just one take and not be demanding of his actors – and it really shows here more than any other film. It’s nearly a remake of Match Point, and just two movie on, it wasn’t very promising for Allen. Luckily it turned out to be a small blip on the radar. I don’t necessarily recommend this one, especially compared to dozens of his other films, but it’s probably worth seeing, to, you know, form your own opinion. It’s not a disaster, and has it’s moments, and a great score by Philip Glass. Just don’t expect too much. (2007) C-
Once you get past the insanely annoying and twatty-sounding narrator, this is quite a fun little movie. Sure, it’s kind of the usual basic Allen plot lines – some sort of romantic entanglements – be them serious, funny, or silly – but for this movie the plot to me is not what drives this one. For me it’s more of the smaller moments – the moments that are so charming they more than make up for some of the few downfalls which are really annoying (the afore-mentioned narrator; the boyfriend character of Rebecca Hall). You have the Spanish soundtrack which is a welcome change from the usual Allen big band choices. The affectionate relationship Juan Antonio Gonzalo (Javier Bardem) has with his father. The gorgeous Barcelona scenery and the warm glow of the cinematography its shrouded in. The contrast in outlooks on life and love that bonds the two main characters. The casting is great – including Patricia Clarkson who is underused but always welcome in just about any film she appears. The calm, quiet and charming confidence of Bardem’s character and performance. And then Penélope Cruz shows up and just steals the movie as Gonzalo’s sort of ex-wife, and an unstable one at that. I’d never really seen her in many movies before, so I didn’t understand her potential, but it was obvious for me in this one what a talent she is. Maybe seeing her firecracker of a character screaming and yelling in the streets of her home country in her native tongue is what it took for me, but WHATEVER WORKS, she is fantastic in this – very funny – and just a beautiful and perfect performance. Despite a few flaws this is surprisingly well-rounded film and shows when Allen branches out beyond his comfort zone – just a little bit – his skills as a writer and director – still to this day – become more apparent than one would think. (2008) A-
This is one movie I can 100% admit I am completely unable to look at this from an objective point of view. It’s a dream combination of Larry David (“Curb Your Enthusiasm”) and Woody Allen, and thus, from my fanatical point of view, bias is not strong enough a word. David plays a character (Boris Yellnikoff) that seems to come natural to him – a bitter, old, New York curmudgeon – and if you find that sort of personality to be funny (at least on film) – you’ll be in heaven here. Underneath it all though, there’s a sweetness to it all. When Melody St. Ann Celestine (Even Rachel Wood) arrives from Mississippi outside Boris’ apartment building looking for refuge, he reluctantly takes her in, and over time develops a relationship, and then somehow finds himself married to her. Then, when Melody’s mother arrives looking for her (played by the fantastic Patricia Clarkson), she finds herself going through her own interesting transformation, realizing that whatever works – just go with it. Everything is taken very lightly (as the title suggests), from the relationships on-screen, to the breezy, bright and beautiful summer atmosphere that the New York setting creates. It may be fluff and it may be silly, but it’s funny, and the actors (particularly Wood and Clarkson) play it perfectly. I see beauty in the weird things sometimes, and I do find this one to be a beautiful piece of celluloid. “Oh my god, entropy!” (2009) A
Another London-set comedy, this time about the highs and lows of shifting relationships between a small set of interconnected families and their friends and colleagues. Typical Allen, with a few twists or even for him a refreshing change, where stories are left unfinished – so much so it makes you wonder – is this the time for Allen’s first sequel? This one is buoyed by fantastic acting from Naomi Watts and Anthony Hopkins who should have been recognized during awards season, as well as a great performance from Gemma Jones who plays the mother of Ms Watt’s character. Light and breezy, Allen struck a great balance from the straight on comedic and straight on dramatic tones of his very recent films. Of all his London-based films, something about this one feels actually British to me. So, time to leave! …. (2010) B+
This one has been hard to fully digest as I have only seen it twice. “Only” – and it only came out a few weeks ago (well, when I wrote this)! HA! However, I am still able to report that this is a fantastic movie, and surprisingly so. I was very excited for this release but for some reason my expectations weren’t so hot. I like Owen Wilson quite a bit, but for some reason I wasn’t convinced he would be a good lead in such a movie, but my assumptions proved incorrect as he does a fantastic job in the role. His performance is very funny, very natural, and he luckily doesn’t try to imitate Woody Allen in any way, which a lot of actors seem to attempt when Allen isn’t in the film (see Kenneth Branagh in Celebrity). Midnight in Paris is just very very fun – and breezy! I love that description, can you tell? BREEZY! Gil (Wilson) is engaged to Inez (Rachel McAdams) and is on vacation with her parents in Paris. He decides to take a late night stroll, and the next thing he knows – when the clock strikes midnight – he is transported to his golden age, Paris of the 1920’s, and ends up meeting and hanging out with many artists of the time (Cole Porter, Salvador Dali, Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, Gertrude Stein, etc). He then meets Adriana – who is currently dating Pablo Picasso, of course, (the ridiculously beautiful and charming Marion Cotillard) and his plan on where his romantic and professional future is headed – his reality of 2010 – becomes altered forever. The casting is fantastic (even the First Lady of France Carla Bruni does a good job in a small role as a tourist guide), the sets are beautiful, and Paris looks simply gorgeous – and this coming from someone who is yet to be convinced of the beauty of Paris. I know, I know, I’m weird. This is a very very fun movie, funny, silly and very charming all around, and I can’t recommend it enough. (2011) A-
