 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"...old CinemaScope lenses..." I might have to go see this one in a theater.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 25, 2014 - 5:48 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Jim Phelps
(Member)
|
I'll be seeing it asap of course, and posting my delightful review in this thread, of course. I mentioned my enthusiasm in the "Sequels, Prequels, Monsters, Robots, Super-Heroes" thread, which is my search for "Grown up" movies. Of course, of course, of course:
"Seeing this photo of Emma Stone (being directed by Woody) has me excited about the upcoming release of Allen's latest film, Magic in the Moonlight. The film opens July 25 in select cities but will open nationwide soon after.
I'm enthusiastic about MitM for this reason as well as its 1920s-South-of-France setting and Woody's perpetual obsession over death and the meaning of the universe. If the film's trailer is any indication MitM also looks to be stunningly photographed. I can't wait to see this!"
http://filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?threadID=98149&forumID=7&archive=0
The film's website has a list of all the places it'll be playing:
http://sonyclassics.com/magicinthemoonlight/dates.html
Oh, and though stating this is "playing the wrong room", the sight of Emma Stone's unbelievably pale skin in the above photo gives me a jolt every time I see it. As the MitM trailer itself states, she is a vision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have never seen a Woody Allen movie (unless Antz qualifies).
I've never seen Antz, so we're even. 
Maybe Allen isn't the kind of filmmaker that interests you. After all, you've avoided him this long. 
If you do decide to give his movies a chance, I would suggest starting off with Midnight in Paris but if you want to see one in which he appears, try Annie Hall.
Let us know how it goes, if it does in fact "go" at all.
Not sure why anyone would recommend starting knowledge of Woody with Midnight in Paris, even if one loves that film, and I guess I'm one of the few who doesn't. The new one sounds dreadful, actually, and many of the reviews I've seen confirm that suspicion.
No, if you want to know about Woody, best to start right at the beginning with Take the Money and Run and Bananas - that's the Woody that took the film comedy world by storm and it's the only way you can see the growth of the artist, watch him hitting his peak, and then watch the hit and miss of everything post 1980. I do enjoy some of those films, but most are just not to my liking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 26, 2014 - 3:34 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Jim Phelps
(Member)
|
Not sure why anyone would recommend starting knowledge of Woody with Midnight in Paris, even if one loves that film, and I guess I'm one of the few who doesn't. The new one sounds dreadful, actually, and many of the reviews I've seen confirm that suspicion.
No, if you want to know about Woody, best to start right at the beginning with Take the Money and Run and Bananas - that's the Woody that took the film comedy world by storm and it's the only way you can see the growth of the artist, watch him hitting his peak, and then watch the hit and miss of everything post 1980. I do enjoy some of those films, but most are just not to my liking.
The reason I mention MiP is because Allen's recent work is a lot less broadly played than the early (and excellent) films you suggest. However, I feel that "easing" in a curious newcomer who might not take to the over-the-top comedies and neurotic nebbish stuff as played by Allen himself as opposed to the surrogates who have played variations on the same character afterwards.
I recommended Annie Hall second because it is the imo quintessential Allen film.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More proof that the 1970s was the best decade for fun and eye-catching movie posters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 4, 2014 - 5:09 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Jim Phelps
(Member)
|
My turgid review of Magic in the Moonlight, though not nearly as turgid as I wanted it to be.
*Possible Spoilers*
The film itself is one of Woody’s lighter efforts but thoroughly enjoyable nonetheless. The costumes, sets, photography, choice of music (mostly Bix Beiderbecke) were all exquisite. Fans of ‘20s jazz will love the soundtrack. Cast performances were all consistently good, with no weak links, though Marcia Gay Harden had nothing to do whatsoever. She was utterly wasted here, which is a shame. Emma Stone was delightful and cute. She gets to wear the most gorgeous clothes and is charming as the young woman who may or may not be a spiritual medium. She and Firth had nice chemistry together with their banter sounding natural and completely unforced. It may be testament to their acting ability but they made a believable couple, which of course doesn't happen until the end, so the two maintain the tension necessary until the denouement. The infamous age gap “issue” was never a factor at any time.
Woody’s script is not one of his finest. Though necessary, there is a lot of exposition at the beginning and the story’s “big twist” is easily figured out. I had it in about ten minutes or so, but that can be forgiven by the dedicated Allen fan. Too many scenes lack the punch of making Sophie and Stanley a romantic couple. There’s a brief bit in the observatory and on their many drives along the French coast, but it felt padded though these scenes; however, thanks to Firth and Stone as well as the cinematography and music, these are never dull, but there should have been more substance to them.
Besides, the real attraction in Magic in the Moonlight is Colin Firth. He plays an aspect of the Woody persona usually farmed out to great actors like Max Von Sydow; the caustic, sarcastic, and unlikable cynic, though Firth is so talented that he is likable despite his character’s arrogance and rudeness which is displayed right from the time we meet him. The other characters comment on this but deal with it in that classy 1920s upper crust way.
Recurring Allen themes and motifs: escaping the thunderstorm to take refuge in an observatory (Manhattan), the older man wanting to take on the younger woman as his protégée and lover, the cruelty and pointlessness of existence, illusion as palliative, magicians, and the transient nature of beauty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
