Comments on: The Complete Woody Allen: A Retrospective Pt. 1 (1966-1990)

By: Billyboy

Billyboy — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

Both Zelig and Another Woman are completely underrated.

Zelig is not only one of the greatest parodies of all time, but a groundbreaking film in FX development and brilliant cinematography by Gordon Willis. People talk about the \”brilliant FX work\” in Forrest Gump when Hanks meets Kennedy. Guess what? Allen did that almost 15 years earlier and much more brilliantly than Forrest Dud.

Another Woman might be his greatest straight drama. Gena Rowlands gives a superb performance completely ignored back then. Allen describes this film as one of his most personal.

Except those two, good restrospective ,guys.

By: Yer

Yer — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

Allen may make a film every year, but in many of those years the output has been mediocre. I\’d rather have Malick\’s once a decade, but high quality output then Allen shoot until it sticks approach. That being said I saw \”Midnight in Paris\” two nights ago and it is fantastic, his best in years.

By: Edward Davis

Edward Davis — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

Whoa, generous grades, guys. Count me in for the \”Interiors\” dust-up. That\’s A-grade all the way.

By: Hayden Maxwell

Hayden Maxwell — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

And let me champion Alice a little. The Alec Baldwin scene is beautiful.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

There\’s no way Love and Death and Take the Money and Run are As if Manhattan and Annie Hall are A-. Annie Hall maybe, but Manhattan?! Crazy.

By: rotch

rotch — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

Great work, but that write up was really weak.

By: rotch

rotch — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

sorry, that Manhattan write up was really weak.

By: Erik

Erik — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

You know, it\’s funny – I\’m one of the most devoted Woody fans out there, but I wouldn\’t rate anything he did before Love and Death higher than a C, and I think Interiors and especially Another Woman are great flicks. I would even put Another Woman in my top five of all Woody movies.

Guess I\’m the opposite of the fans depicted in Stardust Memories!

By: Oliver Lyttelton

Oliver Lyttelton — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

Correction: That Manhattan write-up is an English rose.

By: RE

RE — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

I recall missing the earlier pictures, started in \’77 with Annie Hall. After that I was so hooked on Allen I went to Interiors like my GF made me buy an artsy lamp, meanwhile holding out hope for the next year\’s Woody, looking forward to a comedy. It turned out to be Manhattan. To me Manhattan was in the same league as that year\’s Apocalypse Now. As a devout worshipper of the Woodman, in 1980 I sped to his next, Stardust Memories, expecting it to be Manhattan 2, instead hit it like going face-first into a brick wall at 80 mph. That movie was where the \’70s ended.

By: The Playlist

The Playlist — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

The grades are worth fighting over, yes, but remember, they\’re subjective. Yes, there\’s no way those early Woodies are A\’s over the aforementioned classics, but that\’s MY opinion. Also the person who graded say, Take the Money and run, didn\’t grade say, Annie Hall and if they were being done in relation to each other (as they sometimes/usually are) it would have been different.

By: RE

RE — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

Reducing Annie Hall\’s grade for any whiff of \”misogyny\” seen in 2011?

By: Christopher Bell

Christopher Bell — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:44 +0000

I\’ll have to agree with the grade for \”Another Woman.\” Interesting premise but painfully dull and quite a slog. I like \”September\” better, but I really do feel like those straight up dramas (which includes \”Interiors\”) feel rather hollow at times.

By: Kitty C.

Kitty C. — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:43 +0000

In Hannah and Her Sisters, Holly and her catering partner, played by Carrie Fisher, were competing for the attention of Sam Waterston's character, NOT Holly and Lee.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:43 +0000

That\’s a good point, I wasn\’t thinking about how different critics were reviewing different movies. And someone who reviews Take the Money and Run shouldn\’t check with the person who reviews Manhattan to make sure their grades match up.

By: The Playlist

The Playlist — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:43 +0000

The urge to grade them in relation is understandable and frankly, it\’s how we *generally* do them, but in this case we didn\’t for whatever reason.

But it\’s kinda the way one should review films. Like if \”Sucker Punch\” gets a C-, but like \”Pirates of the Caribbean 4\” gets an F, one might say, \”how do you give POTC4 an F* and Sucker Punch a C-???\” and then answer is well 1) like all reviews, it\’s subjective and 2) we\’re not grading them in relation to the film, we\’re grading them on the film itself and how good, bad, successful or failing they are.

*i made those grades up, i cannot recall what they were graded other than they\’re both ass. 🙂

By: In Defense of Jeff Daniels

In Defense of Jeff Daniels — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:43 +0000

\”and it’s easy to forget that Daniels was quite a good actor back in his day.\”

This statement truly offended me. Jeff Daniels has made many bad movies over the years, but is still a great actor. In the last decade he\’s had some really strong performances -\”The Squid and the Whale\” \”The Lookout\” \”Goodnight and Good luck\” come to mind, and show that he is still at the top of his game in the last 10 years, how dare you insinuate he was only good \”back in his day.\”

Not to mention he owned the 90\’s with his performances in \”Dumb and Dumber\” and \”Gettysburg.\”

Carry on.

By: Catherine Scott

Catherine Scott — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:43 +0000

About Jeff Daniels what we meant was not that he is no longer a good actor, but that, as you\’ve pointed out, his good roles today are few and far between (even though he often does a good job in his films).

What we probably should have said was that he was worthy as a leading man on top of being a good actor, since we don\’t see him taking many lead roles today; it\’s easy to forget that he was once leading man material.

By: goldfarb

goldfarb — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:43 +0000

like many Allen has a special place in my heart/mind that most other filmamkers never will…and when I see each new film year after year my views are never confined to that film alone (for good or bad)…I always see each film as an additional piece of the larger Woddy Allen World…so they tend to average out, the outright classics bringning up the lesser efforts…

By: Emmett Booth

Emmett Booth — Fri, 13 May 2016 14:31:43 +0000

Imagine what the Woodman who made Sleeper would\’ve done with Anchorman had it been his.