Woody Allen

[Antoine Doinel]

Allen's plans to shoot his next film in Paris have been scrapped. The shoot has been moved to London.

Allen Scraps His Paris Summer
Although casting was already underway, Woody Allen has decided to trash his Paris-set project in favor of a third London-based film.
Posted on Wednesday, April 19, 2006 by Mark Umbach

Looks like Michelle Williams and David Krumholtz are going to have to find something else to do with their summer. The pair had been cast in Woody Allen's Paris-set project, which was set to lens in the French capital over the summer, but now Daily Variety is reporting that the Oscar-winning filmmaker has scrapped the project and is returning to the U.K. to shoot his third straight London-set pic.

Variety says that sources close to the project cite a rising budget as the reason for Allen abandoning the project. From the production side, the London-set project seemed like the more viable option. The new project will be a completely different story and feature completely different actors, although the production team of Letty Aronson, Stephen Tenenbaum and Gareth Wiley will remain in tact. In addition, Virtual Films and France-based Wild Bunch, which were to finance the Paris pic, will stay on to provide funding for the London project.

The French film was to be about a group of Americans in Paris. Details of the British-set project are being kept close to the vest, as is the case with most Allen films.

Throughout his entire career Allen had been known for his New York-set films. Now, however, Allen seems to have found inspiration in shooting on the Continent. The new London-set project will be his third British-based film following Match Point and the upcoming Scoop, starring Hugh Jackman and Scarlett Johansson. He's also attached to shoot a film next year in Barcelona using both Spanish and other international actors.

[Dylan]

Anything Woody choses to do is great news, but I really hope he still makes the Paris film someday (not only do I like the idea of him working with Michelle Williams, but surely an Allen script won't go unfilmed!).

[TedW]

I don't understand. What "roll"? Not quantity: Woody Allen has made a picture a year since, I don't know, Nixon, right? And quality has yet to be determined: no one has seen this new movie, and it could quite possibly suck. So what is this "roll" you are referring to?

[Dylan]

I'm probably not one to ask since I've been called by a couple of people on here one of Allen's biggest fans, but in my opinion, the progression of "Anything Else" to "Melinda and Melinda" to "Match Point" is his most beautiful consistency ("roll") in ages (with the latter remaining quite possibly the most fully achieved film of his entire career). As far as I'm concerned, he's as great as he ever was, and I can't wait to fly with whatever he does next. That's all.

[TedW]

Oh, I understand now. I thought it was pretty much accepted fact that Allen hasn't made a film worth watching since Husbands/Bullets era. But if you think Melinda and Anything Else represent quality filmmaking, then I guess you would be excited by what's coming next. I disagree, but that's me. This is nothing against Match Point, which I thought was pretty good and a return to form.

[Antoine Doinel]

I can't imagine any movie with Jason Biggs being "good".

[Dylan]

Yeah, I was in the minority in 2003 and probably moreso now since most people have forgotten about it, but I thought "Anything Else" was a lovely film. With that said, I'm very glad "Match Point" went well with so many people.

[ben d banana]

C'mon, Melinda and Melinda was fucking spectacular in comparison to The Curse of the Jade Scorpion. I'm not nearly as enthusiastic an Allen fan as Dylan (sorry, I didn't like Celebrity either), and find him to be very streaky (he is a sports fan), but he certainly seems to me to be on track again after an agonizing dry spell.

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

To tell you the truth...I can't think of a bad period for Woody Allen. Obviously his mid 90s to Scarlett Johansson period is a lightening rod for criticism, but I honestly think it will be one of his most discussed, say, 10 years from now. Why? Because I don't believe I've seen such a long, experimental transition period from any director in the history of American cinema.

I do agree that he seems lost without a muse, but lost isn't necessarily bad. Allen has been consistent about one thing throughout his career: his repeated attempts to find honesty and meaning in his life. All of his films are very personal. Take Curse of the Jade Scorpion, for instance. Cliched? Eh. Sure, maybe. Even if it is a genre picture, coming from Woody Allen, a self-described worshiper of classical Hollywood escapism, the film feels like a personal memory, a period in time and a genre that he irrationally loves, and he decided to make a film about it. It is a small film, but maybe that was the nature of the memory: quiet, content, self contained. I might be looking into it a little too much, but that was the impression I got from watching the film.

Anyway, all of these films in this period are unique in some way. Either he is reexamining a theme from the past, or he is experimenting with form. Match Point is a little bit of both. It feels like a revision of Crimes, but genre has changed from, well, whatever Crimes is, to Double Indemnity-style film noir, and the "point" has changed from the lack of judgement on our behavior, whether with rewards or punishment, to Match Point's moral, that what we consider luck is actually just the actions of others influencing our lives, and that fate cannot exist since no one can possibly know "what side of the net" justice is on for everyone involved. I bought the DVD today but I doubt I'll watch it anytime soon, as my first viewing remains one of the best movie-going experiences I've ever had. Definitely looking forward to Scoop, and every subsequent film in this new period.

[TedW]

Unsubscribing now. Thank you, gentlemen.

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

Unsubscribing now. Thank you, gentlemen.

Edit: Feeling guilty for being feisty. And this ""roll"" that Dylan enthusiastically mentioned, I would describe it as Allen's decision to begin what seems to be a new era, with a new leading actress, new city, and new personal mission statement (no more comedies) after almost a decade of dabbling. And Melinda and Melinda certainly seemed more assured than his other efforts this decade. For someone that makes a film a year, I would call it a roll as well.[/i]

[Fletch F. Fletch]

C'mon, Melinda and Melinda was fucking spectacular in comparison to The Curse of the Jade Scorpion. I'm not nearly as enthusiastic an Allen fan as Dylan (sorry, I didn't like Celebrity either), and find him to be very streaky (he is a sports fan), but he certainly seems to me to be on track again after an agonizing dry spell.

Agreed. I dug Melinda as well and it really felt like a return to form for Allen. As for his '90s period... I think there is enough material during that decade that most Allen fans can find at least one film they like. For me, I've always had a soft spot for Manhattan Murder Mystery (as it evoked Annie Hall/Manhattan) and found Bullets of Over Broadway and Mighty Aphrodite to be pleasant time wasters.

[Antoine Doinel]

Hmmm....maybe I'll have to check out Melinda & Melinda as the concept really put me off (and the casting - I just can't imagine Will Ferrell in a Woody Allen movie). But to be fair, just about anything in Allen's oeuvre is better than Curse Of The Jade Scorpion.

As for Allen's '90s output, it's largely quite good I think and I think down the line will be regarded very well. I think Everyone Says I Love You was largely underrated and I think Manhattan Murder Mystery ranks with his finest work. Sweet And Lowdown was fantastic and Deconstructing Harry had its inspired moments as well.

[Dear Catastrophe Totoro]

As for his '90s period... I think there is enough material during that decade that most Allen fans can find at least one film they like.

That's exactly what I mean by "most discussed". Everyone has their own favorite film from this period that other people seem to hate. How Allen made such unique but personal films that completely divide his fans is beyond me.

But to be fair, just about anything in Allen's oeuvre is better than Curse Of The Jade Scorpion.

I agree.

I think Everyone Says I Love You was largely underrated and I think Manhattan Murder Mystery ranks with his finest work. Sweet And Lowdown was fantastic and Deconstructing Harry had its inspired moments as well.

I thought Everyone Says I Love You was a creative idea, but I thought the execution was somewhat poor. MMM and Sweet and Lowdown are favorites of mine as well, and Deconstructing Harry is actually my favorite of this period. I think what you said about it (inspired moments) is the nicest thing I've heard about it, ever!

[Andre Jurieu]

But to be fair, just about anything in Allen's oeuvre is better than Curse Of The Jade Scorpion...

... except for Hollywood Ending.

[Matt]

But to be fair, just about anything in Allen's oeuvre is better than Curse Of The Jade Scorpion...

... except for Hollywood Ending.

Well, at least Hollywood Ending had some laughs at Allen's expense in the bits with the Chinese cinematographer. Plus, it was one of the most beautifully shot comedies I've ever seen.

[jorencain]

Plus, it was one of the most beautifully shot comedies I've ever seen.

I have to agree completely with that. I think that every film that he has made since "Curse Of The Jade Scorpion" has been a step forward. "Hollywood Ending" was definitely an improvement, although not very funny. I'm still a fan of "Anything Else", despite having too many neurotic Woody stand-ins in one film, and I really enjoyed "Melinda and Melinda" (besides Chloe Sevigny's awful performance). "Match Point" was very good, if not a little long. There are things about each of the films that keep them from being on the level of his previous work. I agree that he has been on a roll, but I still think his last great film was "Deconstructing Harry." He's on his way towards making another great one, but I think he's still falling a little bit short.

[montgomery]

Well, at least Hollywood Ending had some laughs at Allen's expense in the bits with the Chinese cinematographer. Plus, it was one of the most beautifully shot comedies I've ever seen.

I thought Hollywood Ending was his worst looking film since Bananas (Small Time Crooks was fairly well shot, but the cinematograhy poorly suited to the material). I don't know, Allen made incredible leaps forward, with only a few minor missteps, all through the 80s, until he made "Husbands and Wives" which is possibly his greatest film. I can't think of any director who was so strong throughout the 1980s (one of the worst decades for film ever). He seemed to effortlessly throw out one masterpiece after another. I don't know if it's a coincidence that the quality of his work dropped after the scandal, but since then, he hasn't made any great films. He's made a few very good films: Deconstructing Harry, Celebrity, Sweet & Lowdown, but all of them have some major flaws. And he's made some of the most embarrassing failures I've ever seen from someone I consider a master, including all his Dreamworks films (I thought Melinda was absolute garbage and, because of its ambition, more painful than the comedies that came before it; he could have pulled it off briliiantly in the 80s). Woody Allen is my favorite American director, and probably my favorite living director (except Godard and Bergman), so it pains me to say all this, but I've gotten used to his decline by now.

[j. alfred prufrock]

There is something amazingly appealing about Allen's career. He seems not to care what we think, but continues to make a movie a year as long as he can find funding. I admire that about him-the work is what is important, not the reception. Even if his later films have been, in some people's view, weak, I get the impression that he is making the films that he wants to make.

I hate to say this, but I feel on some levels it is true: Woody Allen is New York's Ozu.

[HerrSchreck]

Woody Allen is New York's Ozu.

That's one of the most unusual comparison's I've ever heard (not least because of the assignation of WA to a city/state, rather than USA. Who is California's Ozu?)

[marty]

Woody Allen is New York's Ozu.

Who is California's Ozu?)

Michael Bay.

[j. alfred prufrock]

Woody Allen is New York's Ozu.

I thought that might be a troublesome comparison. While Ozu seems to capture a time, place, mood and people in a very authentic way for that culture, I think Woody Allen does the same thing. Their ability to make so many films about variations on the same subject also show their willingness to reach deep to define the central themes that they see as defining their world. Certainly two filmmakers couldn't be more different in style and substance, but Allen, especially his films from the 80s, defines a certain place and time, captured it, and I believe continues to capture the essence of his New York. He does it sometimes through fantasy, sometimes drama, sometimes comedy, all expressing different sides of the same thing. I don't think you could say that Allen has that same attachment for all the US. His is a very specific universe, even if it now encompasses London. I don't know- he certainly has my respect. Flaws and all.

[montgomery]

I don't know if I agree with this. Ozu showed the gradual westernization and, one might say, decline of Japan (children who watch TV, don't honor their family, shots of factories, etc.) whereas Allen's New York is completely romanticized, and always has been (in some ways, some of the early scenes in Bananas give the truest portrait of NY in all his films). Allen is obviously in love with and inspired by NY, but he doesn't portray NY as a living city but more as a backdrop. In 30 years of his films, there's been almost no mention of crime, no racial diversity or ethnic neighborhoods, no gentrification, no subways, no poverty, no outrageous rents, no sign that NY is turning into an outdoor mall, no terrorist attacks (a few vague references in the awful Anything Else notwithstanding). I'm not criticizing Allen for this; it's one of his signatures (although there's a fine line between idealizing NY and being totally out-of-touch) but although the Manhattan locale and the rhythm of NY life shape his films, he actually takes great pains to hide the reality of Manhattan, and to avoid showing anything outside of his idealized version of it. You say he shows the "essence" of NY, but that's too vague a word. Ozu was interested in the state and the fate of Japan. If NY was hit by a nuclear bomb tomorrow, Allen's characters, now 20 years old instead of 40, would still be dining at Pastis, talking about Dostoevsky, and about how rock music is just a stupid fad. Then they'd head off to see Bobby Short, or maybe take in an opera.

[Carson Dyle]

Allen's New York is completely romanticized...

Allen would agree with you. When I went to one of the Match Point Q&A's, one of the audience members praised him for capturing the essence of New York. He told her that the New York in his films is a complete fantasy, mostly culled from the movies he loved as a kid. I forgot which movies he mentioned, but he said that he grew up envisioning Manhattan as this glittering romantic destination where people lived in penthouse apartments, went to nightclubs and had witty conversations. i.e. the film within a film in Purple Rose of Cairo.

[HerrSchreck]

The above comments are spot on. As a New Yorker born and raised, I've always appreciated Allen's pumping of NYC, particularly over LA. I think it was in Annie Hall, but it may have been in PLAY IT AGAIN SAM, where "Max" is defending his staying in NYC (which is claimed to be filled w garbage, noise, etc) vs. LA by claiming in typical Allen fashion something along the lines (total paraphrasing from a years-old last viewing) "I like garbage and paranoia; I'm a little averse to going to a place where the telephone operators are in yoga positions and the garbage men eat alfalfa sprouts on their breaks ( ie L.A.)."

But at the same time my roots are in the Bronx and any NY'er not from the Upper East Side knows that the world being portrayed in the stereotypical Allen film is that of the insular zone from the upper east 90's to the mid east 60's, from 5th Ave/Central Park East over to Lexington Ave... maybe over to York avenue at the east river. But this is the vested quarter of old NY money & bluebloods that has "accepted" Allen as one of their own.. an insular world of old money, stagnated scions with no ambitions, TV producers, writers & book reviewers, publishers, corporate CEO's, wealthy widows, Central park meadows, small bistros, indoor tennis courts, hi-end chiropractors, rampant psychiatry, progressive professors at NYU & Columbia, progressive activist young people regarded as cute by their elders, hideous looking older men with adorable college girls, etc. It seems sometimes that much of this is a celebration on Allen's part that he-- a nebbishy little outer borough Jewish kid at heart who sans fame would have trouble fucking a kitchen cockroach trapped in a roach motel-- has gained entre to the life & world he'd fantasized about. Like pre-WW2 Hitler (don't freak out, I'm going somewhere with this) who, as an Austrian (incidentally of partially unclear genetic heritage, though the 'jewish' rumors were probably untrue, his racial 'purity' was not at all a given even as an Austrian) regarded Germany with that pleasurable ache in his heart and yearning in his lower guts as the idealized incarnation of his dream world, fetishizing every aspect of it's existence the way an "immigrant" only can (natives, particularly of this hyper-therapized, high bourgoise upper-east-side class, being too blase for that kind of self-reflexive world-celebration), and similarly devoted much of his "professional" (!) life to the exposition of the 'glory' of his late-in-life-acquired new surroundings.