I Am SO Over Woody Allen
So I’ve always been a little bit reluctant about Mr. Allen. I mean, I like Annie Hall and Manhattan Murder Mystery and other films from decades ago. But none rate among my favorite films of all time. Not even close.
And obviously, the less said about most of the recent additions to his oeuvre, the better.
Even so, I was somewhat excited about Match Point. Lots of buzz! Potential Oscar nominations! Hot, hot, hot Scarlet Johansson!
Boy, am I disappointed.
Seriously. Someone needs to introduce the Wood-ster to a poor person. Just one. I mean, his idea of a bootstrap-picking-up outsider from humble beginnings is this dude who spends all of his spare time going to the opera, going to the ballet, and quoting Sophocles. Not one of his characters rings true except as a time-traveling transplant from a Victorian-era novel.
And let’s talk about subtlety. Let’s see… the plot of the movie involves [SPOILER] poor dude falling in love with rich girl’s money, poor dude affairing [new word] with HotScarJo, poor dude having to kill HotScarJo and her neighbor to keep rich girl’s money, and poor dude subsequently becoming wrought with guilt. I know! Let’s show poor dude reading Dostoyevsky at the beginning! That’ll be REAL subtle.
And also? Let’s establish that the theme of the movie is the importance of luck by having EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER deliver a lengthy monologue about… the importance of luck.
Ugh.
And I haven’t even mentioned the fact that the entire first half of the film was utterly interminable. Thank goodness there was one of those wonderful “House Full O’ Cats” episodes of Animal Cops on when I got home.
And obviously, the less said about most of the recent additions to his oeuvre, the better.
Even so, I was somewhat excited about Match Point. Lots of buzz! Potential Oscar nominations! Hot, hot, hot Scarlet Johansson!
Boy, am I disappointed.
Seriously. Someone needs to introduce the Wood-ster to a poor person. Just one. I mean, his idea of a bootstrap-picking-up outsider from humble beginnings is this dude who spends all of his spare time going to the opera, going to the ballet, and quoting Sophocles. Not one of his characters rings true except as a time-traveling transplant from a Victorian-era novel.
And let’s talk about subtlety. Let’s see… the plot of the movie involves [SPOILER] poor dude falling in love with rich girl’s money, poor dude affairing [new word] with HotScarJo, poor dude having to kill HotScarJo and her neighbor to keep rich girl’s money, and poor dude subsequently becoming wrought with guilt. I know! Let’s show poor dude reading Dostoyevsky at the beginning! That’ll be REAL subtle.
And also? Let’s establish that the theme of the movie is the importance of luck by having EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER deliver a lengthy monologue about… the importance of luck.
Ugh.
And I haven’t even mentioned the fact that the entire first half of the film was utterly interminable. Thank goodness there was one of those wonderful “House Full O’ Cats” episodes of Animal Cops on when I got home.
posted by OleNelson at 12:52 AM
7 Comments:
So, like, is this a remake of Crimes and Misdemeanors?
My secret shame shall be a secret no more - I've never seen a Woody Allen movie.
Whoa, J.Bro! Although I guess I should hang my head in shame for having never seen "The Godfather."
We watched two WA movies in my World Lit class in high school - "Love and Death" and "Annie Hall." I recommend them both - frankly, I haven't seen any since that I enjoyed as much as those.
I give that World Lit class almost total responsibility for any knowledge I have of high-class cultural stuff - as y'all know, I'm a pop culture kind of gal!
Oh T-bone...
I hesitate to respond to this post, as my recent lack of health has prevented me from seeing Matchpoint. By I couldn't wait. So unfortunately my comments will have to be restricted to Woody Allen in general. For all I know, you could be right about Matchpoint. If when I do see it I have something to say, I'll be sure to let you know.
First-- while you are surely right that recently his work has not been that great (and at times downright dreadful-- see Curse of the Jade Scorpion), this is defining the term "recent" as the last five years. The movies of the late 90s are pretty good. Especially Sweet and Lowdown (1999) which I recommend to anyone who hasn't seen it and/or lamments/mocks the Allen movies of the 00s.
Furthermore, while there is certainly no accounting for taste, and Allen movies are not for everyone (and far be it from me to push my tastes on anyone -- I am, if anything, a pluralist), no one can cast judgment with complete information without first viewing some of the best-- and this means more than Annie Hall (which even my parents have seen) and Manhattan Murder Mystery. I'm not sure which ones you have seen, but these would include Sweet and Lowdown, Deconstructing Harry, Husbands and Wives (!), Crimes and Misdemeanors (!), Radio Days, Hannah and Her Sisters (!), Zelig, Manhattan (!), Annie Hall, Love and Death, Sleeper, and Bananas.
These are not all the good ones, but they are the best. To be sure, there are really bad ones too (i.e. Alice).
There is much more to be said -- Allen's influence on film makers (incalculable, but see, for instance, Nora Ephron, or that base imitation of a Woody Allen movie, Rob Reiner's When Harry Met Sally), the comedic genius and philosophical play found in his films -- but I feel I am already ranting.
I close with a warning: I will alert other participants in the 2003 Madison Near-East Side Summer Woody Allen Film Festival. While they may not post, know that they are keeping an eye on you. Watch your back....
For shame (sort of), J. Bro. And for shame (certainly), Spice.
As for Lamp Daddy J. from New Haven, I have a few responses.
First, I have seen all of the listed Allen flicks except Radio Days, Zelig, and Bananas. And I liked many of them quite a lot actually. And one cannot deny his general influence on American cinema (obviously). Overall, a strong thumbs up for Woody.
That said, he is NOT my favorite director. And I just think the "recent" stuff is particulary... boring, I guess. I will still go back and watch the classics but NO MORE new Woody for me.
Is that enough to call off the 2003 MNESSWAFF hit squad?
tsk tsk. bone. your title in and of itself is misleading. to be "over" something you had to first be "into" something and your rant about match point proves you were never a fan of allen's movies.
so why such hate? the movie is a great classic, suspenseful thriller, much like "North by Northwest" or "Rear Window" but maybe your not much of a Hitchcock fan either. and why so poo-poo on the issues of class? Rhys-Meyer plays an x-pro tennis player. how down 'n out do you think he is? and he plays the character so well, you wonder from the beginning his motivation about reading his uppity books and interest in opera, etc. it's not THAT he's into such things, but WHY is he into them? why is he into ScoJo (besides the obvious - she sizzles on camera)? why does he get married? why does he...? i'm not going to spoil it for those who haven't seen it. and j from haven, you and b will enjoy it thoroughly. i guarantee it!
bone, i think you dropped the ball on this review and predict it will be the beginning of far worse things - like losing the oscar contest this year. you're just way off...
Perhaps I was a bit harsh. Admittedly. But Matchpoint in the same league as Rear Window? Really?
Maybe Woody Allen is one of those things, like Laguna Beach and the Teletubbies, that I am just destined to never fully understand.
Post a Comment
<< Home