Vicky Cristina Barcelona (Woody Allen, 2008)

[chaddoli]

Not sure if that's the real trailer. But the film looks great.

[Dylan]

It looks like a promotional montage, or something... I'm guessing the source is a Weinstein Company 2008 press kit. We'll probably get a European trailer and clips from the Cannes website long before the Weinstein's cut the actual American trailer.

With that said, it's really nice to see some clips and the cast appears to be in excellent form.

[Fielding]

This isn't the trailer or even a teaser. It's a montage of snippets put together for distributors at the North American film market a while ago, and was assembled long before the Weinsteins acquired the film.

[AWA]

Great website with plenty of notes, photos and other misc info on the film, both in Spanish and in (reasonably good) English. Includes a short YouTube interview with the cinematographer and notes how Woody intended the title to be read individually, which is what I had thought (ie - "Vicky, Cristina, Barcelona.").

[Fielding]

Some reviews: Variety, Cinematical, Time, and [url=http://www..com/article.php?articleID=9957]another good review[/url]. All positive, natch!

They're all singling out Penelope Cruz for praise - she MUST get award recognition at the end of the year!

And from Time Out Chicago blogger Ben Kenigsberg, this evaluation.

[AWA]

2 clips from the movie now online.

The one clip is from the scene is the one Scarlett recently mentioned in her "Five Fathers" piece in PASTE magazine (which can read here), where Scarlett provides us with a rare example of an acting talent taking the liberty Allen grants his cast to change his words from the script:

SCARLETT JOHANSSON:
“He’s not precious about stuff, which I think is important, especially when you’re working with such a large group of people, and actors that are going to come in with their own ideas. You can’t be too nit-picky precious about phrasing. You’ll tell him, ‘This phrasing isn’t coming out the right way,’ and he’ll be like, ‘As long as you have the same idea, just put it into your own words.’ I think it’s important to give an actor that kind of flexibility.

“For instance, in Vicky Cristina Barcelona, there’s this line where I say, ‘You went through my suitcase,’ but the original line was ‘You went through my valise.’ Nobody would say ‘You went through my valise,” but Woody would say that! I told him, ‘You can’t say “valise” because nobody knows what that means.’ And Woody was like, ‘Really? What do you call it?’ And I was like, ‘It’s a suitcase!’”

[Dylan]

I love the reviews, and thank you so much for posting the clips. These characters appear to be some of the finest creations in Woody's career, and I honestly don't remember the last time I was as excited about a new film as I am about this (I guess the last film I was this excited about was, aptly, Match Point, three years ago). Four months to go...

[rs98762001]

Match Point was atrocious despite its generous reception, but I must say the reviews of this from Cannes have made me hopeful for a long-belated return to form for the Woodster.

[MadJack]

I, too, am very excited about VCB, not least because of Rebecca Hall - one of the most talented young actresses around (along with Hayley Atwell, absolutely stunning in Cassandra's Dream).

But, really, what is with the comments about a 'return-to-form' for WA? Every new film since Melinda & Melinda has been greeted with such statements - and frankly, its complete bollocks. WA is one of my top two or three favourite filmmakers ever, so I supposed I could be accused of being biased, but I don't think he has ever made a completely bad or worthless film (I stop to point out that I haven't seen Hollywood Ending yet, as it has never been released over here and I haven't sprung for the R1 DVD yet). Small Time Crooks comes close - the first half is genius, but the second drags considerably.

Anyway, it looks like VCB is shaping up to be a big(ish) hit, so hopefully a new generation of WA fans will be born, which will bring about a re-evaluation of his post-Mia Farrow work.

[AWA]

I agree, MadJack - Woody has always been in "form", and his films are always worthwhile. It's just that when one of his films has a wrinkle in the fabric, like casting himself in Jade Scorpion and Hollywood Ending with far too young of love interests (or trying to play someone at least 15 - 20 years younger than he was is another way of looking at it), the critics hammer away on him. Plus a new generation of film critics took over and only know Woody the filmmaker - they weren't around or privy to the whole "man of a thousand talents" comedy phenom in the 1970's when he was a filmmaker, massively influential standup comic, New Yorker writer, author, playwright, actor, etc etc etc.

Hollywood Ending is one of his worst, although it is better now than when it was released, at least if you're familiar enough with what happened with Woody's subsequent career after the DreamWorks deal expired with the following film, Anything Else. I don't want to give away the film to you or anything, but the entire thing is funnier knowing Woody was spoofing himself and his future.

Either way, if there was a "return to form", it was Match Point, so it's just lazy journalism to call a film released two years later yet another "return to form". At least write about how it's the second major step of some kind of momentum shift or something, jeez.

Hayley Atwell was great in Cassandra's Dream - her first role, yet another one of Woody's "discoveries" (which VCB is said to have as well in Rebecca Hall, although I guess the Brits are more familiar her?)... I think CD might have been improved with more of Atwell, actually.

Looking forward to this one, and quite curious to see if the next film, the NYC comedy which stars Larry David, is just as good considering it could very well be the first time since 1998's Celebrity he has written a film around a character his own age (which used to be something close to his bread and butter, next to his comedy). And after that he's got complete creative freedom on 3 films budgeted at a $23 million a piece, which is huge for a Woody Allen film. Very, very good reason to be excited right now if you're a Woody fan.

[MichaelB]

Either way, if there was a "return to form", it was Match Point

That's not a universally accepted position by any stretch of the imagination - Match Point generally got pretty lousy reviews in Britain (where there was understandably greater sensitivity towards Allen's ear for dialogue).

In fact, many of the reviews seemed to be harsh precisely because they were expecting a "return to form" and didn't, at least in their opinion, end up seeing one.

[Fielding]

What amazes me is how surprised American critics are at the way Woody is treated in Europe. Duhh! He's a freaking legend, you doofi!

[MichaelB]

What amazes me is how surprised American critics are at the way Woody is treated in Europe. Duhh! He's a freaking legend, you doofi!

Not in Britain, where his stock has rarely been lower. As I said above, Match Point was a surprise critical disaster (given its much more sympathetic hearing in the US), and the omens aren't looking good for the reception of Cassandra's Dream either (it opens this Friday).

Granted, there are specific geographical and cultural reasons why Allen's UK-set films aren't going down well in the UK, but Britain was very much part of Europe last time I checked.

[Fielding]

Well, English critics are doofi, as well! Actually, I predicted they would hate Match Point way back when the project was first announced; it was so obvious they were going to be bitchy and patronising towards the American interloper who was pinching funding from their own precious directors.

Of course, outside of Britain Match Point was a critical and commercial hit. Here in Australia it received glowing reviews and did exceptional business at the box office, then cleaned up on DVD.

[MichaelB]

Well, English critics are doofi, as well! Actually, I predicted they would hate Match Point way back when the project was first announced; it was so obvious they were going to be bitchy and patronising towards the American interloper who was pinching funding from their own precious directors.

If that's even remotely true, then surely the heavily-subsidised Gosford Park would have been slaughtered in the UK?

Trust me, it wasn't!

The crucial difference, of course, is that Robert Altman knew that his ear for specifically English nuances wouldn't be all that great, so he was happy to let writer-cum-cultural adviser Julian Fellowes and his cast put him right.

There are also legions of other "interlopers" who have made films in Britain (and distinctively 'British' films at that) without the critics turning a hair: Michelangelo Antonioni (Blow-Up), Stanley Kubrick (A Clockwork Orange), Roman Polanski (Repulsion, Cul-de-sac), Jerzy Skolimowski (Deep End), Alexander Korda (far too many titles to list) - I could go on for pages.

In fact, your argument is especially absurd given that British critics are actually notorious for favouring foreign interlopers over homegrown talent - Mike Leigh and Ken Loach are much more highly regarded in mainland Europe than they are in their native country.

That said, since it's being discussed in the concurrent Salò thread, I'll acknowledge that one of the exceptions is Pasolini's The Canterbury Tales - but that was critically savaged for much the same reasons that Match Point was: Pasolini showed precious little understanding of the cultural milieu.

[MadJack]

I haven't read any UK press articles on Cassandra's Dream, but I can imagine that they would tear it to pieces. I can't see why though - for me it's possibly his best film since Hannah. The only negative would be Ewan McGregor's accent, but that's not terrible, especially compared to, say Scarlett Johansson's in The Prestige. I fear this is going OT, so...

AWA, actually both Ms Atwell and Ms Hall had much experience before working with WA, mostly in TV, though the latter had a few feature films under her belt as well (inc. The Prestige - where, for me, she completely outshone Ms Johansson in terms of looks and talent, which she will probably do in VCB as well).

[rs98762001]

The British critics were correct about Match Point. It was ridiculously overrated by the Americans, who were so desperately seeking anything with the vaguest dramatic substance from Allen that they lost all objectivity. It's a thin, shallow, silly movie with atrocious performances and a tin ear for dialogue.

[denti alligator]

The British critics were correct about Match Point. It was ridiculously overrated by the Americans, who were so desperately seeking anything with the vaguest dramatic substance from Allen that they lost all objectivity. It's a thin, shallow, silly movie with atrocious performances and a tin ear for dialogue.

Right. It's a bad remake of one of Allen's true masterpieces, Crimes and Misdemeanors. Allen, sadly, hasn't made a great movie since Sweet and Lowdown. And the two that preceeded that one are among his weakest efforts, so go figure.

[MichaelB]

The British critics were correct about Match Point. It was ridiculously overrated by the Americans, who were so desperately seeking anything with the vaguest dramatic substance from Allen that they lost all objectivity.

...and it's worth noting that far from Fielding's wildly off-beam caricature of the British reviews as being "bitchy" or "patronising", the actual tone was one of genuine disappointment - as demonstrated by most of them opening with a "I heard this was Woody's comeback, and I really, really wanted this to be good, but..."

In fact, here are a couple of specific examples. Philip French (The Observer) began:

I've been a great admirer of Woody Allen as writer, actor and director since his debut 35 years ago with Take the Money and Run, and have enjoyed almost all of his films. It therefore gives me no pleasure to say that I found Match Point, the first picture he has made in this country, extremely disappointing.

And here's Peter Bradshaw (The Guardian):

The buzz from the American press about Match Point is almost intoxicating. Can it really be true that our country, our capital city, and the film production company created by our national broadcaster has revitalised the career of one of America's greatest film-makers? In a word, no. Or in seven words: I'm really sorry about this, but no. For its premiere at Cannes last year and its UK release now, Match Point had me sitting in the audience clenching my fists as the lights went down and wishing and yearning for this one to be the big Woody Allen comeback movie, absolutely willing it to happen.

I'm sure there are many similar examples, but you get the general idea. And those were the first two I looked up!

[AWA]

Match Point did $90 million in box office alone around the world, which is unheard of for a Woody film... and to suggest that American critics were eagerly awaiting a Woody film that they could praise is pretty crazy... it is quite fashionable to dismiss Woody these days, before and after Match Point, regardless of what he does. No critic was hoping for a decent effort from him.

And it is quite a good film, sorry folks - so what if it takes a few pages out of the Crimes & Misdemeanors book? The several twists at the end put a fresh, more enticing twist on the story and this is the Criterion forum, is it not? Where the auteur theory is held up and reverred? By revisiting themes, ideas and styles, that's Woody living up to the auteur theory, is it not? Or why does someone like Fellini get a pass when you have something like Roma / Amarcord / countless other semi-autobiographical Fellini films about his youth, which all play on the same basic themes, for just one example amongst thousands?

And as far as the accent / culture representation thing goes with Brits - while I don't live in NYC, I do know people that do and they all say the same thing about Woody - that he is not presenting NYC culture as it is but as he dreams it to be. As he should anyways - he's a filmmaker of comedies and dramas, not a documentary filmmaker. I'm sure Spanish people might be amused by Woody's representation of their culture as well, but I'm also sure everyone that lives everywhere else will be enamored with the portrayal, much like how the Manhattan of "Manhattan" doesn't really exist and never did either - of course, it didn't matter then and it doesn't matter now, either. That's beside the point. I don't think Woody went to London to cultivate their culture to present it to the world - he went there to tell a story he wrote. That's a pretty lame criticism if you ask me, an ignorant one as well. As I said, to say he's misrepresenting the culture and lifestyles of Brits is to suggest he was ever making accurate portrayals of Americans in NYC, which is preposterous.

What was Pauline Kael's comment about Hannah & Her Sisters? New Yorkers toast Woody's films because he presents them with the vision they like to have of themselves? Or something like that.

And denti alligator - outside of Match Point (for me and a whole lot of other Woody fans), I would agree Woody's last "great" film was Sweet & Lowdown, and I would agree Celebrity wasn't great - but Deconstructing Harry is fantastic, one of his absolute best... his weakest effort? Come on! It's also the last film which Woody wrote and acted in a meaningful film about someone his own age.

Either way, regardless of opinions in here, Match Point put Woody back on the map and there is a giant pile of money and film contracts lined up for him until 2011 to prove it, the first time he's had such a multiple deal film in place since 2000. As I said elsewhere, I taught as a TA in a intro-film class this year at my University, where all the students were 17 or 18 years old (I'm 27, btw), and they were all familiar with Woody - as the director of "Match Point". Back home in the country town I come from, Annie Hall and Match Point are the two Woody films you'll find in any small scale ma & pa video rental operation.

Either way, eagerly awaiting VCB.

[Highway 61]

Match Point doesn't deserve the hate, but it also didn't deserve the reception it got here in America. The press went nuts because Hollywood's hottest new bombshell was working with one of the world's most famous dirty old men. The film's detractors seem to be reacting to the sensational coverage and subsequent praise more than the film itself.

[Fielding]

Again, for those with limited comprehension skills, Match Point was a critical and commercial EVERYWHERE - except for the UK, I suppose, and even there it did just fine at the box office. It didn't just get great reviews in the US, but in Australia, France, Spain, Germany, Italy, Greece etc.

It was a brilliant film that fully deserved its success.

[MichaelB]

I don't think Woody went to London to cultivate their culture to present it to the world - he went there to tell a story he wrote. That's a pretty lame criticism if you ask me, an ignorant one as well. As I said, to say he's misrepresenting the culture and lifestyles of Brits is to suggest he was ever making accurate portrayals of Americans in NYC, which is preposterous.

Yes, but there's very little question that his portrayal of Americans in NYC is fuelled by a lifetime of actually living there. Whether or not it's "accurate" is beside the point: the question is "do the characters ring true?" and the answer is usually a very firm yes, whether it's Annie Hall or a more farcical figure like Tom Baxter in The Purple Rose of Cairo.

The problem with Match Point is that to a native Londoner like me, the characters simply don't ring true in the same way, because the dialogue occupies that no-man's-land between being overtly stylised (and therefore entirely defensible) and attempting at least some level of realism (where it largely falls flat).

So it's not so much a case of "misrepresenting culture" as being insensitive to nuances that a native viewer would pick up on in seconds - and it's particularly jarring in Allen's case because his particular brand of cinema is normally highly nuanced. So I'm understandably tougher on him than I would be on, say, a Luc Besson film in English, where the dialogue is usually far clunkier but you don't expect it to be anything else.

And obviously, it's great news if Match Point's commercial success is ensuring a regular funding stream for the next few years, and I note that even a sceptic like Jonathan Romney (who regards the Match Point/Scoop/Cassandra's Dream trilogy as a downward plunge towards a career nadir) was much more upbeat about Vicky Cristina Barcelona.

[MadJack]

Match Point wasn't great but it was pretty good - a bit too long, though. The dialogue didn't bother me in the slightest, despite(?) living in London all my life.

I just wonder why Woody has to make great films all the time - you may say that his last great film was Sweet & Lowdown/Celebrity/Whatever - but that doesn't mean that the ones in between are bad. I think his last great - truly great, absolutely flawless - film was Mighty Aphrodite, but everything since then has still been at best very good, and at worst simply entertaining. Scoop is almost great, but Cassandra's Dream is, as I said before, one of his best ever.

I am very hopeful for VCB, but am becoming slightly wary, as those who have seen it and like it, seem to have intensely disliked Cassandra's Dream.

[exte]

Europe, please stop funding this man