Saw this a week ago at a screening and I have to say I thought it was pretty outstanding. Much deeper than it seems on the surface and very funny and complex. I haven't been much of a fan of many of his most recent films, but this really surprised me.
shareWonderful! This confirms what I've been reading post-Cannes. It's just a pity that a lot of the reviewers there dismissed it simply because it's not radically different like Match Point or even Vicky Cristina Barcelona.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I'm going to agree as i have on other posts. it was a nice few hours. the cast was superb, the situations were standard and very relatable, london was lovely and there's really nothing to criticize. I enjoyed it more than his last few films and think it would have played just as well on the upper westside.
and none of the actors tried to speak like Woody. that was a real relief....
I see all Woody Allen movies. I thought this was one of the less successful ones. It was watchable but far from outstanding. So be forewarned.
sharegranted it's nothing really new but it's really comfortable considering what's out there.....and there's something very comfortable with woody allen movies for the most part. the cast is a delight, even in the smallest roles. and the situations ring true, with some loopyness thrown in.
shareThis is a really "by-the-numbers" Allen film. It isn't especially memorable, it isn't bad, it just sort of "IS." I would liken this to a decent episode of your favorite television series -- there's enough in there for you to enjoy it, but little reason to remember it in the grand scheme of things. I'd rate it 2 1/2 out of 5.
sharei understand exactly what you're saying but i would rate it higher because it's just soo vintage woody. it's not trying to be any more than it is and it's a nice ride. no more, no less but i don't think that it tries to be more. definitely by the numbers, just a little different in subject matter. and really good performances by all....
shareWoody Allen at its best and, as always, unpredictable.
The characters were very interesting and some of them quite "woodyallenic"!
And finaly, I think that, everybody gets what he deserves...
We finally rented this Allen piece, despite my disinterest. This film was so horrible, I left partway through to go slice onions. Hated the characters, hated the film. Too many of the performers seemed woefully miscast. What was up with all the bad accents? Unpredictable???? This film was one endless cliche. The story arc seemed non-existent. Did he let one of his kids write it? Give it up, Woody. You haven't made a good film since you cheated on Mia with her b*tch of an adopted daughter. You two must bore each other to death; what perfect karma!
Put puppy mills out of business: never buy dogs from pet shops!
To greenegg.......Wow! What's a movie got to do with your little middle-class prejudices? Maybe you were really slicing sour grapes instead of onions.
shareWORST MOVIE EVERRRRRRRRR!
shareLike others, I actually enjoyed YWMATDS more than other recent "European Period" Woody Allen efforts. It's a throwback (not a retread) to his old Upper East Side relationship comedies, but with some truly unsettling plot twists/resolutions thrown in. As an older man dating a much younger woman, I can testify that the Alfie/Charmaine arc was spot on (of course, it's the relationship here that Woody himself knows best lol). My only carp was with the casting of Josh Brolin as the struggling writer. I've enjoyed Brolin in many roles (esp. No Country for Old Men), but I just didn't think he worked here.
shareI like everything Woody does, including his recent works, but I can't say I loved this one. It just seemed a bit "off," with sketchier characters than usual and a rather cheap feel in terms of performances and direction. Still it's a pretty solid 7/10 in my book.
shareI felt like I'm the only one who loves this movie. It's one of Woody's best in my opinion.
share