criterionforum.org

AWA wrote:Supposedly the colour on the DVD is nothing at all like the tones it is intended to have.

Hmm, my understanding was that the film's palette was supposed to look pretty dull and washed out, which is just what the colors in this transfer are. I've never seen this on film, myself, so I could be wrong.
(edited to fix misspelling of 'palette' -- Eugene Pallette was not in this film.)

Interesting casting that almost was. From IMDB:

DeNiro + Hoffman Snub Allen Film
6 June 2008 12:21 AM, PDT

Robert De Niro, Jack Nicholson and Dustin Hoffman refused to star in a movie by filmmaker Woody Allen because they were not offered enough money.

The Oscar-winning moviemaker claims the Hollywood actors snubbed the chance to star in one of his movies, because he could not match their huge salaries.

He says, "There are plenty of actors and actresses that have said - even after saying 'I'm dying to work with you so I'd do anything' - that they're not available or they can't work for the pay I'm offering because they have a chance to make a movie for GBP4 million or GBP5 million and they need the money."

"For Deconstructing Harry I tried to get De Niro, I tried to get Hoffman, I tried to get Elliot Gould."

Allen claims Nicholson and Tom Hanks both turned down roles in The Curse Of The Jade Scorpion.

Allen claims Nicholson and Tom Hanks both turned down roles in The Curse Of The Jade Scorpion.

Who said actors are dumb?

So Woody couldn't afford Elliott Gould's salary, but the makers of Busted, Duke of Groove and Michael Kael contre la World News Company could? Or maybe Gould just couldn't pass up the chance to work with Corey Feldman.

AWA wrote:I do know that a friend in retail tells me that Annie Hall has been listed as discontinued to make way for a new release of it. If so, they missed the anniversary boat last year... unless that UA box set has a newer version of it?

I'd love that if it's true, if only to get an anamorphic version.

Just speculating but I could see them doing a few Woody Allen films as special editions and BR releases.

DeNiro + Hoffman Snub Allen Film
6 June 2008 12:21 AM, PDT

Robert De Niro, Jack Nicholson and Dustin Hoffman refused to star in a movie by filmmaker Woody Allen because they were not offered enough money.

The Oscar-winning moviemaker claims the Hollywood actors snubbed the chance to star in one of his movies, because he could not match their huge salaries.

He says, "There are plenty of actors and actresses that have said - even after saying 'I'm dying to work with you so I'd do anything' - that they're not available or they can't work for the pay I'm offering because they have a chance to make a movie for GBP4 million or GBP5 million and they need the money."

"For Deconstructing Harry I tried to get De Niro, I tried to get Hoffman, I tried to get Elliot Gould."

Allen claims Nicholson and Tom Hanks both turned down roles in The Curse Of The Jade Scorpion.

Yeah, not really news at all - just a talking point picked up out of an interview with Empire magazine. He said as much in the Eric Lax Conversations book plus much more.

Hoffman turned down Woody Allen but took a paycut for Huckabees? He should fire his manger twice.

Huckabees is great, and Hoffman is a lot of fun in it. Rewatched it again last night.

You are also fired.

I just watched Manhattan Murder Mystery tonight, and was surprised by how much I liked it. I expected it to at least be funny, of course, but there was actually a lot more to it than just the light trifle it's made out to be, even by Woody himself. There's especially a lot going on with the look of the film and the way its structure and visual strategies relate to film noir and mysteries, with its implicit and explicit references to Rear Window, Double Indemnity, and The Lady From Shanghai. I've been watching Allen's films in chronological order, and though I realize I'm on the precipice of where consensus says it gets real bad, I've already gone through some supposedly fallow periods and found something to love in virtually all his films thus far. This one especially was fascinating in its formal playfulness and both Keaton and Allen are just hilarious. Such a great comedic duo.

I was much like you, I had been fed the line that his worst films were in the 80s/90s, but I found that to be his most productive and interesting period compared to his overrated and slight 70s films. Did you notice teen Zach Braff as Allen and Keaton's son?

Yea, I caught that, it's pretty random the people who show up in Allen's films sometimes. Do people really say that 80s Woody is bad? Broadway Danny Rose, Hannah and Her Sisters, Radio Days, Another Woman, and obviously Crimes and Misdemeanors -- I'd rank all those as among his best. I definitely prefer these films to the "early, funny ones," at least, though I'd throw in some of the late 70s films as great ones as well.

I also LOVED Shadows and Fog, which seems to be all but universally maligned. As far as I'm concerned, his only real flop through the whole of the 80s and early 90s was the mediocre Alice, which kind of reads like an unnecessary comedic retread of the same territory as Gena Rowland's unmatchable performance in Another Woman.

It is quite fashionable for critics to suggest that Woody's output declined steadily in the 90's and ended up in pure garbage this decade. Which, of course, isn't true at all - it's just critics repeating other critics to make sure they're not saying anything unfashionable.

There is some truth that Woody's habit of producing a master-Woody work every couple of years dropped off a bit in the 90's - the only three that I would say qualify are Husbands & Wives, Bullets Over Broadway and Deconstructing Harry, with Sweet & Lowdown close behind - but everything else is at the very least quality, meaningful film that decade and nary a stinker in sight. Celebrity and Alice are probably his two worst films from that decade and realistically, had someone else's name been on them they might be looked at in a much better light today.

Woody's worst is easily the infamous DreamWorks deal from 2000 - 2004. But, if you're appreciating his work up to this point I can't see you hating any of that, other than maybe Anything Else, which I know some people love (I don't - still watchable, of course, but I think it's his worst film).

The sad reality is, unless Woody goes on a tear of three or four great films, critics are waiting for him to die so they can sound like geniuses when speaking highly of "overlooked" and "forgotten" corners of his career, to praise the same work they themselves dismissed. Which is why nine times out of 10 I don't give a shit what half the critics say about anything, really. I hope Woody out lives them all.

AWA wrote: Woody's worst is easily the infamous DreamWorks deal from 2000 - 2004. But, if you're appreciating his work up to this point I can't see you hating any of that, other than maybe Anything Else, which I know some people love (I don't - still watchable, of course, but I think it's his worst film).

I agree completely. The films between Sweet and Lowdown and Match Point were, without a doubt in my mind, Woody's creative nadir. Anything Else was an excruciating experience.

Continuing my journey through Woody's complete filmography, tonight I watched Bullets Over Broadway. As with Manhattan Murder Mystery before it, I found it a thoroughly enjoyable comedy with smarts and substance to spare, making me wonder why so many people seem to pick MMM as the cutoff point before Woody went downhill.

Bullets Over Broadway was one of his most critically popular films upon release and was nominated for five Academy Awards, three for acting plus writing and Best Director-- it just barely missed getting the Best Pic nod, so I guess I'd never heard anyone consider Manhattan Murder Mystery the cut-off point.

BOB also got noms for the terrific sets and costumes--7 in total, the most ever for a Woody film.

And it even had a poster with "A film by Woody Allen" preceding the logo.



Meanwhile, I love Chazz Palminteri in this film.

sevenarts wrote:making me wonder why so many people seem to pick MMM as the cutoff point before Woody went downhill.

MMM was the first Allen film released after the Soon-Yi relationship broke. Keaton stepped in to play a role intended for Farrow and to support Allen. And apparently, Huston was a last minute casting decision in a role originally intended for a much younger woman. With that history, it became the cutoff film.

You also have to keep in mind that Allen's previous film, Husbands and Wives, was his first in several years not to be released by Orion. Columbia handled H&W and MMM, and they clearly had no idea how to market them while Allen was becoming one of the most reviled men in movies--that is, if they even cared to begin with.

But yes, the film does not deserve the stigma. The locations are Allen's strongest showcase since Manhattan, and the finale is wonderful, a rare example of homage done right.

Are the three early MGM box sets worth picking up (I am really on a Woody kick and would like to finally won these films!) or would I do better waiting another year? What are the chances that more than just a select few of the "big" Woody Allen titles will receive new transfers and releases in this format?

OliverB wrote:Are the three early MGM box sets worth picking up (I am really on a Woody kick and would like to finally won these films!) or would I do better waiting another year? What are the chances that more than just a select few of the "big" Woody Allen titles will receive new transfers and releases in this format?

Yea they're definitely worth getting. Considering that Woody himself is the one opposed to any DVD supplements, I think the chances of these being re-released is pretty slim. The transfers on them are already fine, so the only thing they'd really need are some extras, and that's not gonna happen, other than maybe for one or two of the most famous ones. The box sets are great, and when I was just getting into Woody I poured through those in chronological order and loved practically every film in all three sets.

Why is there a common misconception that the majority of Woody Allen's have "good transfers" on DVD? The truth is the quality is all over the map. Manhattan looks fabulous, while Annie Hall looks like no restoration was done at all. There is so much dirt and grime on that film and that kind of inconsistency is across the board. Personally, I'm waiting for these films to be properly restored for a nice BluRay set.

sevenarts wrote:As with Manhattan Murder Mystery before it, I found it a thoroughly enjoyable comedy with smarts and substance to spare, making me wonder why so many people seem to pick MMM as the cutoff point before Woody went downhill.

I think the consensus - and bear in mind that I think consensus is an idiot - is that his films went downhill from Celebrity on. Everyone Says I Love You got great reviews, as did Deconstructing Harry, but Celebrity was just savaged.

Antoine Doinel wrote:Why is there a common misconception that the majority of Woody Allen's have "good transfers" on DVD? The truth is the quality is all over the map. Manhattan looks fabulous, while Annie Hall looks like no restoration was done at all. There is so much dirt and grime on that film and that kind of inconsistency is across the board. Personally, I'm waiting for these films to be properly restored for a nice BluRay set.

Well, I'm no DVD Beaver, so as long as a film looks OK and is transferred progressively, I'm pretty happy. A lot of these, especially the older ones, definitely don't look pristine, although there are some that have especially stunning transfers: Manhattan, September, Radio Days, Broadway Danny Rose, etc.