criterionforum.org

During Bravo's now-and-again Woody Allen weekend marathons (today it's Purple Rose Of Cairo, Radio Days and Crimes & Misdemeanors) I caught (one of the many) TV spots for VCB. Not one mention of Woody Allen in the entire ad. I guess these days it's easier to sell one of his films without mentioning him

They did that with Anything Else and look how well that turned out for the box office.

I saw this tonight. It was utterly fantastic.

I was also really pleased to see, when I was waiting in line beforehand, this little old lady hobble up to the ticket counter and ask for two tickets to see "that new Woody Allen movie." I was kind of gobsmacked, really -- there are apparently still people other than a few cineastes who go out to see each new movie Woody makes? I was happy to see a packed theater at the local arthouse, though, after Cassandra's Dream was around for barely a week.

domino harvey wrote:They did that with Anything Else and look how well that turned out for the box office.

True, but to John Q. Public, Scar Jo and "the guy who won an Oscar for playing Anton Chigurh" are going to be a bigger box office draw than Christina Ricci and "the guy who, like, fucked a pie."

And I did catch a TV spot during the Olympics yesterday that pulled a Corliss quote from Time saying this is "Woody Allen's best movie in 20 years," which would of course a) identify this as a Woody Allen movie, and b) inherently make the claim that it is superior to Crimes and Misdemeanors.

This was a really good one. I wouldn't say fantastic, because I wasn't bowled over by any profound revelations within, but it was an enjoyable sit with great narration, cinematography, and a stellar performance from everyone involved (especially Rebecca Hall, who is being unfairly slashed out of any advertising for this movie for no good reason).

While this is no way a proper major review, some points I observed about the film:

- by far the most close ups I've ever seen Woody do in a film. Still many master shots, but he even cut away for reactions, which is strange in itself as he talked about this being his most "European" style film to date... and in that sense, it was his most American so far. Not a complaint, but in terms of it being a Woody film, it was very different.

- also cinematography in itself was very unusual - most fluid camera movement since the days of his work with Carlo DiPalma, a TON of stedi-cam shots that were, for the most part, effectively used. Untypical for a Woody film, even the stedi-cam shots that started wide immediately went in for close ups.

- Possibly the best use of a "city" as a character in the film since "Manhattan". Barcelona, it's many inhabitants, architecture and culture(s) were a major force in motivating the characters and was always present even when it wasn't direct.

- first 15 or 20 minutes the film stumbled a little bit to gain traction and this initially made the narration feel forced. It got moving though and once Penelope Cruz's character entered the fray, it caught fire for real and made up for lost time in a hurry.

- Cruz and Bardem have an incredible chemistry together on screen and worked the love/hate dynamics to remarkable results. Their effortless gear shifting between English and Spanish during conversations in different ways added a wonderful element of naturalism and fluidity to the dialogue.

- Bardem himself was fantastic. He took a character that many might have found hard to believe and not only made it believable but relatable. His mannerisms, speech inflections and slightest gestures made the character shift effortless from predatory creep to noble, wise, sophisticated, charming, warm and loving which is no small accomplishment.

- it is refreshing to see a complicated form of love portrayed, and although Woody has a long track record of being a major proponent of expressing a far more complicated version of love in his films this is by far his most ambitious. The fact that he makes it believable and sympathetic to an audience which is surely not going to have too many personal cases to relate to of their own is even more interesting.

- some great, seemingly on-set guitar playing featured in the film. Also a wise choice to use a local band's music, which worked well throughout the film.

- Johansson's best work with Allen to date, she has matured even more as an actress since Match Point and Scoop. Less visible effort on her part.

- critics like to cut and paste the predictable criticisms of Woody films, but this is further example of Woody experiencing a late career evolution where he has certainly padded his repertoire with some new tricks - this is the first example of a different kind of comedy from him. Very subtle and under played, the only character who even remotely played comic material like the Woody style we all know is the Messina American husband character, who is often in the background with the humor. Woody even fades out the audio when that character is about to tell the old standup joke about a woman buying a Persian rug.

- The film wisely focuses more on Bardem-Cruz-Johansson rather than following Rebecca Hall's character more often.

Overall, 4/5 for me and stands next only to Match Point as Woody's best film this decade. If I started grading the film from about 20 minutes onward, it would be a 5/5 as the first portion is only average 3/5.
Certainly his best comedy-romance since Sweet & Lowdown in 1999.

There were moments while watching this where I was thinking to myself, "Holy God, this might be Woody's greatest film." When all is said and done, it is one of his ten best. I usually find much more to admire in Allen's late-period films than most of the crowd here (for example, a recent third viewing of Melinda and Melinda yielded a bountiful return), but I believe Vicky Cristina Barcelona is Allen's newest masterpiece. I’m as guilty as anybody of indulging in hyperbole far too often than should be permitted, but I mean what I say that viewing this was a rapturous experience. This is exactly the kind of film I live for and want to see, and wish I could see more of (and therefore, if I ever make movies, or write novels, this is my wheelhouse), and even though my expectations for this were high, it so thoroughly surpassed and dismantled the bar I set that I'm still thrown for a loop.

It looks gorgeous from the very first shot until the final fade out - warm, honeyed and open-air - and the soundtrack is masterfully assembled and I must say all of the tunes (and the way they're used in the context of the story) have stuck with me. The film is also highly sensual without even slightly slipping into anything resembling legit eroticism, which I respected and admired. Allen's approach to portraying highly sexual situations is more akin to that of Truffaut or Rohmer than, say, Bertolucci.

If I were to be critical, it would be nice if the first act was just a tad bit longer, showing us a bit more about the women before they arrive in Barcelona rather than merely (and literally) telling. Second would be, while I loved the narration, I would've preferred the off-screen narrator to have been female.

By the way, regarding the narration - how it's written, what details it provides and where it pops up - I was reminded a little of Truffaut (particularly when it's being read over the amazing shots of the three riding bicycles). And while it does take a couple minutes to get used to the narration, it's graceful and soothing once you're engrossed in the narrative, and it does ultimately give the film the feeling akin to that of a great novel or short story. Or shall we say, a classic European film.

Rebecca Hall gives my favorite performance in the film. She provides an impeccable delivery of Allen's breathtakingly funny sarcasm and warmth. Javier Bardem is also fantastic, and Scarlett gives the greatest performance of her career. Cruz is also in excellent form, as expected after her terrific turn in Volver.

All in all, my favorite director has once again made one of my favorite films. I look forward to seeing it again and again. I haven't loved a new film this much in years (well, yes, since Match Point). I'm very excited about this movie, and I'm recommending it to everybody.

I was kind of gobsmacked, really -- there are apparently still people other than a few cineastes who go out to see each new movie Woody makes?

Well, I'll top that - I slipped out into the night life with some friends following the screening, and all through the night this film was the token topic of conversation between women my age (early-mid twenties), always referring to it as (drum roll) "the new Woody Allen movie" (though some did add "with ScarJo"). It's wonderful to hear it...

I'm going to wager that with this film Woody will enter his first legit period of widespread public popularity and acceptance since before he and Mia Farrow split. He came close to achieving this with Match Point, but this will solidify that. It will also, perhaps, earn him his first Oscar in over twenty years. He sure deserves it, at least, he wrote and directed the hell out of this.

AWA wrote:Overall, 4/5 for me and stands next only to Match Point as Woody's best film this decade. If I started grading the film from about 20 minutes onward, it would be a 5/5 as the first portion is only average 3/5.
Certainly his best comedy-romance since Sweet & Lowdown in 1999.

Glad you liked it.

By the way, I still can't believe you thought Scoop cost only $4 million.

Fielding wrote:I still can't believe you thought Scoop cost only $4 million.

Is this pointless and endless argument going to follow me over from IMDb now as well?

If you don't believe that, then would you believe I heard a similar figure quoted from Woody Allen's biographer Eric Lax during one of my phone conversations for an interview I did with him about the "Conversations..." book? Because, well ... I did. And that's about as a credible source as you can get.

AWA wrote:If you don't believe that, then would you believe I heard a similar figure quoted from Woody Allen's biographer Eric Lax during one of my phone conversations for an interview I did with him about the "Conversations..." book?

Perhaps your memory of the interview is as faulty as your memory of the book.

Fielding wrote:

AWA wrote:If you don't believe that, then would you believe I heard a similar figure quoted from Woody Allen's biographer Eric Lax during one of my phone conversations for an interview I did with him about the "Conversations..." book?

Perhaps your memory of the interview is as faulty as your memory of the book.

Or perhaps I mixed up the two sources of information previously, which should be understandable as it is the same person the information is coming from.

Is this really worth discussing here though? Really?

This film is the reason why the word "beautiful" was invented

Rachel Hall needs more recognition. Her performance was luminous.

Part of the problem of her not getting more recognition is because people get her name wrong. It's Rebecca Hall. (And yes, she is the most luminous actress in the film, by far!)

Oops my bad. Haha.

The narration reminded me of the beginning of Magnolia.

Did anyone else notice during the last scene when (I think it's the narrator) says "She only knew what she didn't want" and then you hear "Barcelona" on the soundtrack in the backround

So, it came in at #10 this weekend (pretty impressive for being on two to three thousand screens less than the rest of the top ten) but it was #2 for per screen average. I look forward to seeing how well it does when it expands.

Except it won't be expanding.

Waitasec. It may, like the universe, be expanding after all. The plan is to increase markets on Labor Day.

I'm amazed there are still people who think Match Point was good.
Still, looking forward to seeing this.

What do you mean, still people who think Match Point was good? ...it was.

mfunk9786 wrote:What do you mean, still people who think Match Point was good? ...it was.

Match Point's the greatest film of the decade. I went back and saw it three times during its first two weeks of release, and I've never done that before. One of his best.

Dylan wrote:Match Point's the greatest film of the decade. I went back and saw it three times during its first two weeks of release, and I've never done that before. One of his best.

The greatest film of the decade? Interesting. I saw it twice. It's nicely made but still average, Allen's second twist of Crime and Punishment. It sails on the similar river as Paranoid Park. The latter I prefer a lot more, it's far more tragic because the teen never intends to kill the guy while in Match Point, the killing of that woman is intended and that leaves me no space to feel for the killer except disgust and he gets lucky. Big deal. I will always remember the Van Sant teen, atoning himself by becoming a writer only for and to himself. In that I find extremely powerful and transcendental.

Michael wrote:It sails on the similar river as Punishment Park.

Do you mean Paranoid Park?

swo17 wrote:

Michael wrote:It sails on the similar river as Punishment Park.

Do you mean Paranoid Park?

Corrected. Thanks.

Dylan, I didn't mean to poop just like that. Your choice of Match Point as the greatest film of the decade took me back a bit.

This really isn't the thread to debate Match Point, but I have written plenty on it elsewhere here (as I have most of Allen's recent films). My thoughts have not changed.

Did you see Vicky yet?