Despite having overdone and overused his neurotic, twitchy, New York nerdy lead for too many years afterwards, Annie Hall was very innovative at the time, and still rings true at its essence.
Not only is it a great time capsule for the mid to late 1970s for relationships, but also for the general culture of its time.
It'll always be a classic, even if a number of his other films won't, in the ultimate test of time.
Yeah the period from Annie Hall, Manhattan, Hannah and Her Sisters even up to Crimes and Misdemeanors was probably his artistic peak.
shareAgreed, even though Manhattan annoyed me in many ways. I'd add Alice to your list of Allen in his prime. Although Interiors was panned, no doubt because it was a more serious (yet all the same with some great comedic moments) and more quiet film, it too was part of his prime efforts.
shareI liked Interiors and Another Woman as well... I have no problem with his Bergman lite films. I'm guessing you probably dislike Manhattan because of the baggage attached to the underage relationship but European cinema portrayed these types of romances all the time. I didn't have a problem with it because Tracy (Mariel Hemingway) was a wise, intelligent girl that was more mature than Diane Keaton's character and past the age of consent in many other countries.
shareI also liked Another Woman. I'm not a particular fan of Bergman so don't admire that aspect of what Allen borrowed from him. I suppose it actually annoys me to a degree.
Yes, the underage aspect of Manhattan bothers me, but not just in this film, and not solely because he eventually got involved with Soon Yi and married her. Mariel was excellent in it, but she was all the same virtually a child.
-
shareYeah it's always been hard buying that all of these young beauties would fall for him, but because I liked the scripts I just went with it. After watching several of his movies I eventually got used to it and even felt bad because I thought I was just being shallow by thinking that way. Bogart I think dated Bacall with that kind of age gap... I think they cast him next to Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina with even a bigger difference and of course Cary Grant did this until he was in his sixties I believe. Of course no one complains if it's Cary Grant. I didn't think Tracy was that weak... of course maybe because I saw this when I was younger than her she seemed mature to me but she seemed like a believable character.
share-
shareThe whole point of Manhattan is to say how all of them are pretentious pseudo intellectual idiots pontificating about meaninglessly memorized facts and who are all missing out on what's truly beautiful in life... (his list at the end and personified by Tracy)
I don't respect what Woody did with Soon Yi because of his betrayal of Mia but he's been with her for years, well beyond where one would say he's only with her for appearances sake unless they've only conspired for her to play a sort of beard for him while he carries on with his cast members. Whenever I see them they seem to be enjoying each other's company.
-
shareExactly, it's always been difficult buying the young beauties who fall for WA or his stand-ins. I could go with the scripts to a point, but this was repeated endlessly with WA's films; whether or not he was the leading man, others were stand-ins for him later on.
Never did he cast a film with a woman being older (or less attractive) than a leading man, or weaker. If he had, I'd have a different opinion of him, and thought more of him as a writer or director.
I respect your position on that... for me it's a matter of whether one person is exploiting another... if he was using a dumb 20 year old it would bother me more than someone dating an intelligent 17 year old with mutual respect. Don't get me wrong, I personally follow the law... but let's face it if we lived in nature before there were calendars this wouldn't be an issue. You should watch Scenes from a Marriage... that was probably more similar to what Allen did than the Seventh Seal or Persona... or maybe Wild Strawberries... Bergman made some cool films and they aren't all the same.
share-
shareThanks for the respect. I respect your position as well.
Mariel wasn't a dumb 17-year-old in Manhattan by any means, however, all the same she was only 17 years old (as a character). The power balance was way off, no matter how you look at it.
A smart 17-year-old is never going to be equal to a smart 47-year-old, regardless of gender, and even less so in a bright female-to-male situation. There are very few films or shows that portray an older woman/much younger man scenario in the reverse, which is one of the problems. The few that exist make a big deal of it as a plot point, not that it wasn't part of the plot point in Manhattan, because it was.
-
shareBTW, it's great to have this kind of discussion, whether we agree or disagree, I appreciate it.
shareyep :)
share:) This is what I love about these discussions. It's not a matter of pounding someone else to try to force them to agree with you, it's just discussion. What I say may change your opinion and what you say may change mine. Or not.
Either way, hopefully, we'll learn a little bit from one another.
-
shareI don't think Bergman's perfect but I feel bad for people when they don't even like works by great artists... it reminds me in fact of Yale and Mary's academy of the overrated in Manhattan. Not that all of our tastes should be the same but when people's standards are so high that they enjoy almost nothing I worry for them. I remember this guy who happened to be an action movie fan that only liked James Cameron's Aliens. I knew him for well over a decade and every time I'd talk to him about movies he'd only point how they fell short of that film. Reminded me of someone who was obsessed with a lover and just couldn't ever get over that one person.
shareI thought Aliens was an excellent film, although I'm not particularly a fan of action films. It has to be good for me to be a fan, regardless of genre.
For example, I'm not a fan of westerns, but The Big Country transcended genre because of the writing and the acting.
Hopefully you can see where I'm coming from. If not, that's all right.
I like Aliens as most of us do (although I think Alien is the better of the two). I usually settle that debate by saying Alien is a better horror film and Aliens is a better action film. But this guy would come up to me weekly and tell me how whatever he watched was inferior. He was literally obsessed. Fortunately I like all genres of films so I'm rarely lacking something to watch.
I think I only mentioned that film because you all were saying you didn't like Bergman much which is perfectly fine. However, I know people that would only watch shows that get over an 8 on imdb. This works for someone that watches movies once a month, as you should have enough to last you a lifetime. However, if you watch one a week, or daily or even twice a day then you will have a problem as there simply aren't enough shows with over an 8 rating to last you more than a few years. My point was that it's good to have high standards but if you set them too high you won't have much to watch like my Aliens friend.
I much prefer Aliens to Alien, because the character development was so much superior, IMO.
Personally, I'm not either an action or horror film aficionado, but purely as someone who has a great appreciation for film in general, regardless of genre, to me Aliens is far superior.
Unlike your friend, I'm not at all obsessed with Aliens, or any film, for that matter, or any director, or actor.
I'm not a great fan of Bergman simply because I'm not a great fan of the dissonant downbeat tone he consistently beats. This may appeal to some, and I get that. For me it has nothing to do with using Hellman's or (what's that other one? on the west coast it' called something else) mayonnaise or white bread, or anything to do with any of those superficial stupid things, although I found that to be pretty funny as a WASP stereotype, as he portrayed it.
I'm no longer a fan of WA because he beats the same drum, and uses the same schtic, and has become far less innovative than he used to be. Even though I liked Midnight in Paris, to a point. To the point that I've watched it two times.
But if you enjoy his films, both then and now, even without any criticism, then more power to you, and by all means, continue to enjoy them!
The man is 81 years old now... give him a break! Most people would be happy to be thinking straight at his age, let alone writing a new script each year. Even so I think all great comedians or comic writers have a sell by date... Maybe that's why Robin Williams felt despondent knowing his best years might have passed him by. As I said earlier, I respect all of those who have problems with him in the same way I do those who can no longer stand Mel Gibson but both of them are great talents in their own ways.
shareIMO he was beating the same drum for many decades -- the same tired jokes.
Yeah, yeah, neurotic NYC guy, intellectual, Jewish, blah blah, and particularly obsessed with a much younger (goyish) woman.
Robin Williams was a very different kettle of fish. He wasn't stuck in the same old, same old that Woody Allen was, and still is, at least up until this point.
Hey listen, if you're a Woody Allen fan, and always will be, more power to you, and may you enjoy his films -- past and present. I still enjoy some of his past films too, and may even enjoy some of his present films -- at least to a point. But I'm never going to love them the way you appear to, for the reasons I've already outlined. We don't have to agree on this. We're allowed to have differing opinions, and it's evident we do.
-
shareThanks. Personally I don't read criticism -- film, book, art, or otherwise -- but it's nice to know others have noted the same thing in his work, or worse (which I didn't realize).
I too respect that his work has touched many people, and apparently still does. I was drawn in, to a degree, to Midnight in Paris, myself, although I couldn't say it's one of my favorite films. But, overall, I enjoyed it, and you've got to admire someone who churns out a new film every year like clockwork, even if some are less good than others. All the same his production of films is impressive.
If he inspires superfans to such a degree, more power to him, and to those whose eyes twinkle with enthusiasm when viewing or talking about his work.
-
shareI agree that he bangs out a film each year, and it really can't be expected that they'll all be great, or even good, when someone's producing that often and regularly.
In general, I've liked his ideas, especially the earlier ones, which were more diverse. I've just grown weary of his neurotic NYC Jewish intellectual schtick, and his fixation on infidelity, and women goys, etc. If he knows he's repeating himself, I'm glad to hear it. He's got a brain, but has it evolved at all? I don't see any evidence of it, which makes me wonder exactly how much of a brain he actually has. I've lost interest in it anyway.
Mel Gibson I just can't get behind anymore. He's a good instance of Marlon's post about how much -- or if -- a celebrity's personal life or behavior affects one's view of their work. While I still like some of his earliy work, I'm definitely less enthused about him in general. Is that because he became such a nutcase, or because his work devolved? I'm not sure, and frankly I really don't care either way.
-
shareHa, I don't know enough about him to know he still sees his therapist about the same things, but that rings true, going by his films.
If his fans aren't bothered by his repetitiveness, and still think he's a genius, god bless them. May they continue to enjoy his new and newer films as much as they did his old and older ones. I'm not on that train myself, but that's me.
I was an artist (painter) for the majority of my life, so the whole "artists are special, more sensitive, and have license to be more outrageous" thing doesn't work for me.
Some of my artist friends reached acclaim, and some didn't. I can't say the most talented amongst them did, but a couple of them did. Anyway, at the moment that's all else I have to say on that topic, although I admit it's a good and interesting one.
I don't know Hacksaw Ridge. Would have to Google, but am assuming it's not exactly a great film, given your context.
I don't think much of Woody Allen as a person either, but then I never have. It's not due to the Soon Yi thing, although that probably just affirmed what I'd already sensed about him early on.
As far as the incest charges by his daughter, I don't know either way. The only two people who DO know are he and Dylan. He's messed up and always has been, and frankly I think the same of Mia Farrow, so we'll never know the truth.
Gibson? Doesn't matter to me. I was never particularly a fan and am less so now simply because I think he's an ass.
-
shareOkay, whenever you feel it's appropriate and/or germane, I'll do my best to answer as best I can :)
I know, I don't know what to make of Dylan. I hate to disbelieve her, because if it really DID happen, how awful that it not only happened, but that there are people who don't believe her.
As messed up as I think he is, if he really is a pedophile, wouldn't he have shown this earlier, or later? Or has he, and we just don't know about it. I don't know. As I said earlier, truly, only Dylan and Woody know for certain what really happened, and possibly a few others, who aren't willing to talk. I just don't know!
No 9 you didn't come off as offensive at all... I just left the conversation to watch more shows and go to sleep. See you around.
share-
sharePersonally, I'm not a great fan of Alien. For me AlienS was far superior in character development and in basically all ways. I thought the alien bursting out of the guy's chest was silly, but that's me. We all have our own opinions, no matter the show or film, right?
share-
shareMaybe I (the real me) should write "I love you!" Okay, I don't know you well enough to say that, but I do love that you love the chestbuster moment in Alien, and don't care that I found it silly :)
… I really wish you'd posted on IMDb, instead of lurking. You've got a lot of interesting things to say, and are quite articulate. I don't care if we agree or not, I enjoy reading what you have to say.
-
shareI'm sure you did read a few of my MM posts, at one time or another, as I eventually posted there often. I take no offense that you don't remember my name, or anything I posted (which probably wasn't that memorable anyway!).
It really was a great board. I still hope that many of the regulars there will find their way here, eventually. If not, oh well, I guess that's the way life rolls.
Heh, okay, let's get a room at tMDb so we can continue our back-and-forth without boring everyone else :)
Cat have ever seen the Original version of The Day The Earth Stood Still ? Starring Michael Rennie. I printed out the short story it is based on. You can see my post about it if you look it up on Original site of the movie. I find it to be good sci fi. Oh I've never seen Annie Hall.
shareThanks, nice to hear for a refreshing change. I'm well aware of the writers/directors/authors I'm *supposed* to like, but many of them I just don't. Doesn't matter to me that I'm supposed to. Emperor's new clothes, to me, and all of that. Not to say that I don't respect those who like and appreciate those that I don't, or vice versa.
share-
shareYeah, the ending was great, and I too think it stands the test of time, yet was also innovative for its time in that it was more honest than most films that depicted relationships. Which isn't to say all "romcoms" or "chick flicks" (really hate that disparaging ghettoizing) aren't honest because they're more hopeful.
In this case, it worked. It was innovative and honest for the time, and not just the time. It's not thoroughly true, but there is truth in it. At the time, this was innovative. In ways it still is.
If the era of "Annie Hall" was Allen in his prime then he must've had a reemergence in the mid-2000s because "Match Point" is the best Allen flick I've seen; and "Midnight in Paris" ain't no slouch.
Also, I'd take "Scoop" over "Annie Hall," although I like the latter.