Woody's love-it-or-hate-it films

Thanks for the interesting link. The subsequent Woody's Theft Guide was quite good as well.

cheers, Matt

I've never understood all these preconceived expectations about what Woody Allen should and shouldn't do with his films. Exactly why should all his films be comedies? I'll never understand that.

I would agree that it is odd that so many people seem to think Woody Allen should stick to a specific formula. Any deviation from the Groucho-Marx-with an-inferiority-complex style seems to garner negative reactions. Interiors was the film that made me realize how amazing Allen really is, the film is absolutely brilliant. I certainly found myself on the love it side with all of the movies listed. The man has some enormous range, even amongst his comedies he shows some incredible ability to experiment, push and subvert a genre that he created. Seinfeld in paticular owes a great deal to Allen's comedic work.

"Blue Chair" I just read that link, it was an interesting read and i certainly agree with your claim that certain reviewers manifest their dislike of Woody Allen via their reviews of his movies rather than assessing them in an oblective light; hence the reason why I never allow a negative Woody review to stop me from watching his movies. There was one thing I wanted to take issue with in the following article however. Amarcord is described as "juvenile and self-defeating" that is patently ridiculous, Amarcord is perhaps my favourite Fellini movie and any Fellini fan would be able to apreciate what he was trying to create with this visually beautiful and romantic yet poignant journey through into adulthood. I'm confused further when I read that this guy cites 8 1/2 as one of his favourite movies, obviously then he is a Fellini fan but how could he not appreciate Amarcord. Anyway interesting article, but sort that other reviewer out.

Don't you think a big problem in Woody being misperceived is that a lot of viewers(myself included)are not going to immediately see the philosophical depth of his work because they are too busy laughing at the jokes? Then they are handed a film by Woody without those very jokes(like Interiors). They say:"WTF is this? Jerry Lewis here thinks he's Ingmar Bergman???"

When, really, that depth of thought was always there. Questions about morality are not only in Crimes and Misdemeanors, but also Manhattan. Questions about Art vs. Life are in Play It Again Sam just as much as Interiors. The question of what relationships are about is Annie Hall, not just the grittier Husbands and Wives. The idea of a personal epiphany of the hollowness that one has lead in life is the same in the "comic" Alice and the deadly serious "Another Woman".

The irony is is that some reviewers(Pauline Kael, for example) who DO see that Woody has approached these big questions complain instead that his films are TOO similar to one another. He can't win for losing. Like a true artist, he doesn't try to please any of them.