Woody Allen FIlm? - Play It Again, Sam (1972) Discussion

[–] The_White_Hotel 19 years ago

I think of it as a Woody Allen film even though someone else directed it, it features enough of Allen's preoccupations and has Allen-esque directorial flourishes like the cutaways to him and Tony Roberts as Italian chefs/British aristocracy etc.

"Obviously you're not a golfer."

reply

[–] monsieurzy 19 years ago

woody allen has stated in interviews that he hates any of his early films that he didnt get to direct, this one included...I find this odd as the movie plays EXACTLY like any of the films Allen directed himself..and yes, it is one of his best

reply

[–] lostintwinpeaks 19 years ago

I would definitely consider this a true Woody Allen film. Many reasons:

1. It's based on his own stage play.
2. He wrote the script.
3. He stars in it.
4. Diane Keaton is in it. (Their first pairing.)
5. Allen regular Tony Roberts is in it - in fact, he plays his best friend just like he does in "Annie Hall".
6. A lot of it feels like a genesis for the later "Annie Hall".
7. It feels and plays just like an Allen film (all the usual analyst references, main character is a total neurotic, romantic pairings, one-liners, etc.)

I think this film is great, better than many of Allen's later self-directed efforts. Less pretentious. Good pairing of slapstick with Allen's usual neuroses. Great gags. And some really good parallels to "Casablanca". Also, the San Francisco setting is interesting and makes a change from the later New York ones.

reply

[–] suckerdwsp316 19 years ago

i do. ross directed it, but its allens film. the script, the lead, keaton, roberts, the plot, the story, the one-liners... oh yeah definitely a woody allen movie.

reply

[–] SStevo165 18 years ago

Can anybody tell me WHY he DIDN'T direct this one?

reply

[–] Kinematico 17 years ago

This is a Woody Allen film even if he didn't direct it. "Play it Again, Sam" is Woody from the beginning to the end.

Seems that Herbert Ross understood perfectly Woody Allen play and his way of thinking.

This remembers me "The Nightmare Before Christmas" that wasn't directed by Tim Burton (Henry Selick) but "feels" 100% like a Burton film because the original idea, script and the spirit of the movie came out right from Burton's mind.

Exactly the same happened with "Play it Again, Sam": is Ross doing an "Allen" movie.

reply

[–] ellery-6 16 years ago

I absolutely count it as one and I always rank it in my top 5 along with Annie Hall/Manhattan/Hannah/Crimes. It's more "Woody Allen" than half of the films he's directed! The first time I saw this I don't think I have ever laughed so hard in my life.

It also shows Woody at his absolute schmuckiest, which in my opinion is the way he's SUPPOSED to be. Maybe that's why he doesn't like looking back on it, now that he's used to getting all the hot women in his films...

reply

[–] Exorcist666 16 years ago

As Viacom legend Sumner Redstone said to producer Brian Grazer during their "Iconoclasts" episode, "The most important thing in a film is the script."

Writers often times, are most of the reason a film succeeds, or does not.

reply

[–] Howlin Wolf 12 years ago

I'd have it as his, but I am biased in favour of writers!

Born when she kissed me, died when she left me, lived whilst she loved me

reply

[–] Mark_Graisons_Moustache 12 years ago

Yeah, if you didn't tell me Herbert Ross directed this, I would believe Woody did. It feels 100% like something he would do just a few years later, like "Annie Hall" or "Manhattan." When I had my full-on Woodython a few years ago, I decided to only watch the movies he wrote and directed, because otherwise I would have to include crap like "Casino Royale" or "Scenes From A Mall" or "Antz," so I also skipped this one, but when I recently rewatched it, I absolutely think it counts as a Woody film.

Abby: "Olivia, something terrible has happened."

Olivia: "What, did you run out of eye makeup?"

reply

[–] NumeroOne 12 years ago

It plays just like a Woody Allen film, but with less narcissism. Notice how often Allen appears in wide shots, how much physical humor happens at his expense, and generally how little it feels like the movie's universe revolves around him. Compare it to Bananas, which is so much more Allen-centric.

I hate to say it, but this movie made me realize that Woody wasn't really the greatest director in the early days. For that reason, this one really stands out from the pack of his early films. I bet you he learned a lot from Herbert Ross on this one.

"Under strengths... You just put 'Accounts.' That's just your job." ~David Brent, The Office

reply

[–] franzkabuki 11 years ago

Well Stiffy never did become a great director when it comes to strictly cinematography - for one thing, as he`s admitted himself, he don`t even have the patience required for that. Essentially, it seems that after the script is done, he hires competent actors, an excellent director of photography and is happy to sit back and watch the soup eat itself, so to speak.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

[–] spookyrat1 10 years ago

I bet you he learned a lot from Herbert Ross on this one.

I'm sure he did too, though I think it was only Ross's fourth film as sole director. But for much of his career Ross seemed to have a great affinity for comedy, as well as musicals and light drama.

I think the direction in this film complements Allen beautifully and as other posters above have noted, it has lots of the other Allen hallmarks of the period.

reply

[–] jtf1986 9 years ago

I was just looking through Woody Allen's directorial filmography in order to count how many Woody Allen films I have seen and was puzzled why I couldn't find this one. It plays out just like the other early Woody Allen movies that he did direct.

reply