Casino Royale (1967)

Every spy movie has to have some sort of mystery in it. The mystery here: who the hell thought this was a good idea? I mean, it’s not like the legit Bond movies take themselves all that seriously, so how far can you really go in parodying them? The answer to that question is painfully evident here. Every so often this movie raises itself up and achieves a level of extraordinary stupidity; the rest of it is a mishmash of lame, incomprehensible, unwatchable, or some combination of all three. The only moment in the movie that is even within hailing distance of competence is the baccarat scene—and that’s the one part of the script that plays it straight! Otherwise, this is a bomb of staggering proportions, a film that is so bad it can’t even achieve "so bad it’s good." Seriously, I like a spoof as much as the next guy, but this...words fail. At least, as I struggle to find something good to say, I can at least report that a few of the women in the flick are great to look at. So there’s that. Otherwise, yeesh. Your mission: avoid this at all costs.

Blue Jasmine

I think this is a very good movie, but I’m not really sure. These days it’s tough to tell if Woody Allen is achieving something subtly brilliant, or if he’s just wasting our time with nonsense. I suspect the former here, but I’d be willing to listen to arguments for the latter. This film comes across, beginning from the first scene, as an almost clinical examination of a maximally unlikeable character, set (in flashbacks, at least) in the typical Allen setting of the insular world of New York’s extremely rich, with occasional sojourns into working-class San Francisco. The setting and story make you think that some overarching political statement is being made here...but maybe not. It’s really opaque, and hard to tell what the director really thinks of these people, or even if his main character finally gets the comeuppance she deserves. (The ending is so open-ended that anything thereafter is possible). So it’s hard to say about this movie--yet, I’ve already written a long paragraph about it, and am still thinking about it, so it’s a movie that certainly makes an impression, probably through the excellent performances if nothing else. Watch it and judge for yourself.

Midnight in Paris

A work of singular irony, in that the most retro--some might even say backwards, or stuck in the past--of all filmmakers, Woody Allen, has made a movie that ultimately celebrates forward motion and moving on to new things in life. So much for context. The film itself, in terms of story, characters, and presentation, is fine, maybe even better than fine, though lightweight enough that it has little impact beyond a cute and clever way to kill a couple of hours. There is the barest subtext, fitting for these times, about the awfulness of rich people, and why Owen Wilson's protagonist is better off making the choice he eventually makes--but there's no ringing declaration made here. This is, after all, just a movie--one good enough that you should give it a look, if not an award.

Melinda and Melinda

Two divergent and competing story lines feature smug, pretentious, rich New Yorkers vs....smug, pretentious, rich New Yorkers. Perhaps that wasn't the wisest choice. But this one has problems from the ground up. The movie presents a concept story, one that may have merit in its own right, but all concepts take place within a context, here that context really works against the tale(s). The Architectural Digest interiors, the profoundly elite lives and professions of the cast, the insular feel of the presented milieu--all are distracting and work to hamper the viewer's appreciation of the philosophical puzzle being put on display. Worse still, the stories have their own share of weaknesses: the dramatic events seems shallow and unimportant, the comedic turn comes across as bland, unfunny and lacking in true wit. Both threads suffer from weak, stilted writing, and feel artificial, flat, and too "inside" to appeal to most viewers. Top it all off with the violently unfunny Will Ferrell pretending to be Woody Allen--a tired act we've seen before, and done better by better actors--and the movie comes up short in every facet. This film would have been an inferior effort from a first timer; from writer/director Allen, it's a disaster.

Crimes and Misdemeanors

Woody Allen's well-crafted story comes with a light touch, but ultimately hits like a haymaker. The subtle descent of Martin Landau's compromised ophthalmologist into further and further depths makes for riveting viewing, and while the secondary storyline--Allen and Alan Alda vie for the same woman--is less compelling, each tale reaches the same ending in a fascinating climax. Brief philosophical discussions, both bloodless and vibrant, and some crafty symbolism tie the whole thing together in a resolution that is surprising and provocative (and sadly, probably true). The film's impact comes not just in that resolution, but even past that ending, when you're thinking about it a day or two later. A powerful film.

Love and Death

The best of this movie comes in the form of great one liners and gags. The rest of the film is just silly stuff that doesn't play as well. But really, those great jokes really are great jokes, more than enough to keep you interested and laughing.

Sweet and Lowdown

More chameleon-like work from Sean Penn, as a heelish jazz guitarist, and an adorable performance by Samantha Morton as the mute woman who loves him. As for the story itself...you never get bored watching it, but there's also something missing. The tale just doesn't click. On the other hand, if you dig jazz, you'll love the soundtrack, and the performance sequences are amazing (you'd swear that's Penn playing those tunes).

A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy

This is a comedy; it says so right in the title. A sex comedy, no less. It's also a Woody Allen movie, from back in his more consistent days. So why is it so banal? The writing is occasionally funny, and it's gorgeously shot, but it never really catches fire. In fact, the most amazing thing in this movie is Tony Roberts's helmet-like hair.

Zelig

It's a brilliant concept for a movie: retelling the forgotten story of a "chameleon man" of the '20s and '30s in a "mockumentary" style. The execution is uneven; occasionally it reaches hilarity, though for most of its length Zelig simply maintains an even (though funny) keel. Interestingly, though it is now twenty years old, the movie's period focus--and purposely aged look--keep it from looking overly dated. If only Woody Allen's whole career could have kept itself so fresh.

Hollywood Ending

It would be premature to say that Woody Allen is "back" here, but by an objective and fair standard, this is a funny movie. It doesn't click right from the start, but once the ball gets rolling it becomes an nice bit of work.

Deconstructing Harry

A good moment or two, but mostly a muddled mess. Made at the height (depth?) of Woody Allen's troubles; maybe that had something to do with it.

Manhattan Murder Mystery

A tepid work--something all too typical for recent Woody Allen. Not enough good jokes to make it worthwhile.

Radio Days

Maybe this is where the downward slide started. Woody Allen's self-indulgence, which served him well early on, began to pull him down with this bit of autobiography. A nice idea--life during Allen's childhood, in the "radio days"--arrives too disjointed, too hit or miss, too erratic to be called a success. The film is better during the family sequences than the inevitable, shoehorned-in Mia Farrow storyline (back when she and he were still tight). The overall cast is excellent, the presentation is sterling and accurate to the period, but that self-indulgence--and some heavy-handed "statement" scenes--do just enough to pull this movie down. Not awful, but not what could have been.