woody allen

Party at Woody's place:

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-XV554_mag071_G_20130613142614.jpg

^c'mon I'd never leave my screening room.

Marshall McLuhan predicted books would become art objects at some point. He was right.

My mother taught me a value — rigid discipline. My father didn’t earn enough, and my mother took care of the money and the family, and she had no time for lightness. She always saw the glass a third full. She taught me to work and not to waste time.

If you’re born with a gift, to behave like it’s an achievement is not right.

I love Mel Brooks. And I've had wonderful times working with him. But I don't see any similarities between Mel and myself except, you know, we're both short Jews. That's where it ends. His style of humor is completely different. But Bob Hope? I'm practically a plagiarist.

It’s been said about marriage ‘You have to know how to fight.’ And I think there’s some wisdom to that. People who live together get into arguments. When you’re younger, those arguments tend to escalate, or there’s not any wisdom that overrides the argument to keep in perspective. It tends to get out of hand. When you’re older, you realize, ‘Well, this argument will pass. We don’t agree, but this is not the end of the world.’ Experience comes into play.

http://www.esquire.com/features/what-ive-learned/woody-allen-0913

I agree with most of those, but this --

A corned-beef sandwich would be sensational, or one of those big, fat frankfurters, you know, with the mustard. But I don't eat any of that stuff. I haven't had a frankfurter in, I would say, forty-five years. I don't eat enjoyable foods. I eat for my health.

-- is the saddest thing.

I agree, especially since at most he'd be endangering the films we'll see from 94-year-old Woody.

Also his characterization of his mother suggests that The Floating Light Bulb, his '81 play, is significantly autobiographical.

I haven't had a frankfurter in, I would say, forty-five years.

: (

That robert weide doc mentioned upthread is on iplayer at the moment, v. highly recommended if you haven't seen it.

How Woody Became a Hack

... how could such a hurried, unrehearsed process not show up in the work? Watching post-2000 Allen films, nothing stands out so much as the lack of specificity in the performances. Sometimes the cast even sounds like it's running through a first-day table-read. Most actors will tell you that creating a fully rounded character is a process. Without adequate time to let that evolve, you are more often than not going to get performances heavy on emoting and archetype, light on originality and depth. (Perhaps this is the reason so many of Allen's male leads ape his famous inflections -- it's the only thing they have to latch onto.)

...Now consider this, from the book Directing Actors, by Judith Weston:

Woody Allen, in a 1994 New York magazine article, disclosed that the reason he uses one wide shot for most of his whole scenes is partly because it's quicker and cheaper, but mostly it is for the actors, because it is a way to "let them talk," and to allow overlapping.

It's the "quicker and cheaper" I'm interested in. Since 1977, Woody Allen has made at least one picture a year, an incredible streak. But consider what it takes to conceive, write, and direct a quality film, one that has something new to say and does it well. Could anyone produce such a movie on this tight schedule? Is it any wonder that Allen's camera setups are expedient, the themes repetitive, the acting cardboard, the characterizations clichéd? If Woody Allen were churning out genre potboilers, an assembly line approach might still yield a passable final product. But he's not; he continually attempts to wrestle, either comedically or dramatically with the deepest questions about the human condition. That takes time, effort, and most of all thought -- if you don't put these into it, if you're on automatic pilot, you're going to get a work that is basically stillborn.

http://www.kqed.org/arts/movies/article.jsp?essid=124365

his kid (maybe) is pretty funny - http://gawker.com/mia-farrow-says-woody-allens-son-may-actually-be-frank-1440233819?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

thread about ronan

What The Waht...

He then went home to change his bloody clothes and ate lunch at Wendy's before seeing a Woody Allen movie at Hollywood Hits, a theater not far from his Danvers home which he shares with his mother and two younger sisters, according to police.

http://news.yahoo.com/teen-raped-popular-teacher-killing-her-indictment-states-235247146--abc-news-topstories.html

well..

http://www.eonline.com/news/498566/mia-and-ronan-farrow-slam-woody-allen-s-golden-globes-tribute-via-twitter

O'Hehir triages the films into 4 periods:

http://www.salon.com/2014/01/11/making_sense_of_woody_allens_confusing_career/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast.html

more discussion on that one in the mia thread

Mia Farrow's son -- Ronan Seamus Farrow -- really creeps me out!

pardon me, the ronan thread.

ah, thanks, i am interested in discussion

it's Broadway's feelgood hit of the spring!

http://bulletsoverbroadway.com/

Woody has weighed in on Gaza, I know you were all waiting.... also Colin Firth-Emma Stone film is imminent.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/18/woody-allen-on-magic-in-the-moonlight-the-crisis-in-gaza-new-york-city-and-those-allegations.html

NY Times profile felt like a journalist distancing himself from his assignment. "Woody has always lived in a world of illusion," etc., etc.

a new ranking, entirely respectable; #2 often my favorite. Happily nothing from the 21st century nor Bullets over Broadway.

http://www.slantmagazine.com/house/2014/21/the-10-best-woody-allen-movies

years since 1969 where woody allen failed to release a new directorial effort:

1970, 1974, 1976, 1981

poll

life expectancy increased in each of those years

in '70 Woody was wrapping up the Broadway run of Play It Again Sam, in '76 he had the lead role in The Front, '81 he had a play produced at Lincoln Center

nice sidestep by woody in the daily beast interview when asked about lena dunham

feel it is more likely woody allen is the sleepy grampa he is describing there than that he is pulling jedi mind tricks on journalists

he definitely knows who lena dunham is

i mean, she writes and directs a show called Girls, amirite?

and she called him a monster and a lousy filmmaker etc last winter

an interview centering on filmmaking technique, esp cinematography/editing

http://www.rogerebert.com/interviews/simply-do-it-talking-with-woody-allen-about-directorial-style

Cannot believe how much uncritical press (ie not mentioning Dylan Farrow) this guy is getting right now.

are you serious

Yes?

NYT article had like one blithe paragraph in the middle, Chi Trib article (http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/movies/ct-woody-allen-magic-moonlight-20140723,0,4313909.column) has a couple of dismissive paragraphs

I'm not defending the press, to be clear, just that I dunno why anyone would be surprised that some unpleasant allegations are conveniently swept under the rug when it comes time to promote the latest work of one of the most famous and widely regarded white male American film directors, now in his dotage.

"now"

America happy to be entertained by murderers, child abusers, wifebeaters, racists etc. why would they stop now

lol Alfred, I did actually sweat the wording of that a little

xp

Before the last round of scandal, it's hard to imagine Allen not on the cover of Arts & Leisure when a profile comes out.

Keep in mind that Woody Allen is the same age as the people who still pay for print subscriptions.

nothing actionable or proven, so let's go on with the show fuckit

I'm sure that calculus is also foremost in the mind of the press - should they keep harping on these allegations knowing full well nothing will ever come of them, or should they keep feeding the well-oiled promotional machine that pays their bills. not a tough choice really.

it's weird how people announce their surprise that people are surprised

like why doesn't your cynicism extend further

I assume everyone is more cynical than I am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-_Akm40RJQ

back to the lost cause of Simon Abrams' ebert.com interview:

When I see cool films, no matter how beautiful they are, there's something off-putting about them. I have all my characters—or 99% of the characters—dress in autumnal clothes, beiges, and browns, and yellows, and greens. And I have [production designer and long-time collaborator] Santo Loquasto make the sets look as warm as possible. And I like the lighting to be very warm, and I color-correct things so that they're very red.

Sometimes, the cameraman will be shocked. Sven Nykvist said "My God, their faces will all look like tomatoes!"

And I said "Well, let's try it." He got to like it.

WA also says Brando was terrible at being funny... dunno, The Freshman

I particularly liked the section about editing Annie Hall. Ralph Rosenblum's book is one of my favourites.

^^^ me too

That was a cool interview, nice to hear Woody's thoughts on style, and a great Willis quote:

Gordon always used to paint with light. He'd do the fundamental lighting, and then he'd say "Ok, I've got the lighting basically done. Now I'm going to paint for a while."

re Farrow accusations do you think it's something journalists should address?

Also it seems to me (maybe something I picked up on the Blue Jasmine thread) that there's some antagonism towards recent Woody films on this board? I found Blue Jasmine and Midnight in Paris very very good, Whatever Works, Vicky Cristina Barcelona and Match Point very good and the rest of his post 2000 production really enjoyable.

imo its not per se that reviews need to hand-wring about the morality of liking a new emma stone movie, so much as their prose should be informed by the fact that their subject may not be an awesome guy just cuz he's consistently brought the middlebrow chuckles