Also in many respects I find 'Match Point' to be better than C&M. I remember reading an excellent post by Rosenbaum on this. Will post it here.
Printable View
Also in many respects I find 'Match Point' to be better than C&M. I remember reading an excellent post by Rosenbaum on this. Will post it here.
AvarukAga vAthAda mAtten, I disagree to one or two points. For example, on Allen being annoying all. I am always happy to see him on screen. Anyway, good that you guys read that piece. Thilak, waiting for the post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
Hmm.. I guess he didn't like the Woody story at all. It is extremely well done. It is what prompted me to start this thread actually! Very first post.Quote:
In almost all respects, Match Point is an improvement over Crimes and Misdemeanors. It’s better crafted and more absorbing, and it doesn’t have the distractions of Allen’s wisecracks and extended banal philosophizing.
What is an affair? The man who is never going to leave his wife but has an affair promising his mistress, so. Is it outright duplicity? Is it self-delusion (Sidney Pollack - hating being judged, wanting to relax standards and then realizing he is judgmental and possibly that's what he wants!). Does Jonah want to leave his wife - seems unlikely. He seems to have had an affair because he could afford to. i.e. that he could live a life he has not had a chance to.
The visceral reason is the man with sexual appetite wedded to a menopausal (oru yoogam dhaan) wife. But look at his choice. With Dolores, he has someone who would hold him in awe for being what he is. It's not like he lowers his standards. He doesn't quite see the dignified life becoming of his social station is stifling. But his day-job life with its politeness, reservedness, gentleness is what he has to keep up with, just to be where he is. Whereas with Dolores, it is something out of place, grand. Something she would reach and aspire for. The aphrodisiac-ness of this cannot be understated.
And Woody makes you understand Dolores' desperation. The unchaste, kept woman threatening exposure has rarely (adhaavadhu, naan paartha varaikkin) been shown so damn well.
It is not just the pure hurt at being spurned and used that is working her. She will never ever get a better man that Jonah. And Jonah knows that - indeed that was part of the high!
That is why he knows she will stop at nothing, that is why he knows he HAS to kill her.
It seems clear as ever to us that she is not his intellectual, social match. 'you're kidding me, if you thought this was for real' is what you want to say to Dolores. But a girl - that too not a very bright one - past her prime, with few takers couldn't've believed her stroke of luck when she got Jonah. And one can understand how she may have fallen for him. She is so not a simple gold-digger (for you to feel she 'deserved to die').
I didn't feel Nola in MP was anywhere near as well fleshed out.
And the Woody-Mia Farrow story is also exactly about the intellectual match business. It is not a pure/non-judgmental love (is there anything like that?).Woody is in no social position to cheat on his wife! Yet that is what he tries to do. He also thinks his wife is no match for him. He thinks nearly as poorly of her as thinks of Alda- who is shown to be his 'superior' not just in the 'ways of the world' but also in terms of 'poetry reading'!! So - if only he were not that endearing and relatable a character - we can judge him pretty harshly for putting the moves on Mia Farrow. And we see right before our eyes she is going to smash his hopes and headed exactly in the feared direction. In the end Woody's character does climb his high and lonely moral ground.
And for the charges of "highbrow posturing" (I don't think I fully understand what you are agreeing with k-g), Allen has always made fun of it from inside, no? In C&M for instance, Woody's character is shown to be one with a disproportionately bloated ego.
There are several places where he does this. VCB for example - the famous v/o in the picnic scene - he talks about the free spirit of Europe :lol: That's a bloody mockery of the feel of the movie! The girls are enjoying a European vacation, we think we are enjoying a European movie. But by mere tongue-in-cheek mention he all he makes us think that perhaps the girls just think they are drinking in Europe, and by extension, so are we! End of the vacation, we have to pack our bags and come home and be our confused, restricted selves.
Yes, his people seem to believe 'a good life is art-appreciation based'. And they are - the funny ones atleast - anxious about having opinions about them. But by simply presenting these clamorous, clumsy individuals Woody seems to be repeatedly saying life is elsewhere (the wordless Opera scene in Manhattan - what excellence)
In Interiors, he has the husband talk about being afraid of his anger after he wrote a caustic review of his friend's book. Is he is he afraid his opinions are more important to him than his relationships or is he afraid, he is overbalancing to ensure that is not the case? Who is to say? Isn't this quite close to the problem of the intellectual who can't date a girl who believes in sun-signs?
That's a little uncharitable. ennamO ippo dhaan graduate aana maadhiri.Quote:
Whatever happened, Allen has finally emerged as something of a storyteller
I was captivated by Woody's parts at first. But then, you start feeling more for his story than Angelica Huston. There's something fundamentally wrong if you get distracted like this. Particularly so that the film is about crime.Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
One other problem I had is that Landau's relationship & domestic situation was neither suggested or portrayed with as much conviction as Pollack's in H&W, or Meyer in MP. Landau's seems harmonious & manageable.Quote:
What is an affair? The man who is never going to leave his wife but has an affair promising his mistress, so. Is it outright duplicity? Is it self-delusion (Sidney Pollack - hating being judged, wanting to relax standards and then realizing he is judgmental and possibly that's what he wants!). Does Jonah want to leave his wife - seems unlikely. He seems to have had an affair because he could afford to. i.e. that he could live a life he has not had a chance to.
The visceral reason is the man with sexual appetite wedded to a menopausal (oru yoogam dhaan) wife. But look at his choice. With Dolores, he has someone who would hold him in awe for being what he is. It's not like he lowers his standards. He doesn't quite see the dignified life becoming of his social station is stifling. But his day-job life with its politeness, reservedness, gentleness is what he has to keep up with, just to be where he is. Whereas with Dolores, it is something out of place, grand. Something she would reach and aspire for. The aphrodisiac-ness of this cannot be understated.
The suggestion seems to be that he had a random fling & he held on it. But he grew out of it.
He could have exposed it & stood a good chance of holding on to the family.
It turns into a blackmail & uncontrollable situation because his financial wrongdoings stood a chance of being exposed.
Hmmm. I looked at it in a different way. There's always a part in him that inherently desires to be amoral. Maybe it's in the DNA. The brother is a goon. Maybe it's the upbringing. There's a childhood sequence of an aunt influencing part of his subconscious. Despite the conditioning, there's still that part wired in to him.Quote:
And Woody makes you understand Dolores' desperation. The unchaste, kept woman threatening exposure has rarely (adhaavadhu, naan paartha varaikkin) been shown so damn well.
It is not just the pure hurt at being spurned and used that is working her. She will never ever get a better man that Jonah. And Jonah knows that - indeed that was part of the high!
That is why he knows she will stop at nothing, that is why he knows he HAS to kill her.
It seems clear as ever to us that she is not his intellectual, social match. 'you're kidding me, if you thought this was for real' is what you want to say to Dolores. But a girl - that too not a very bright one - past her prime, with few takers couldn't've believed her stroke of luck when she got Jonah. And one can understand how she may have fallen for him. She is so not a simple gold-digger (for you to feel she 'deserved to die').
Is the person conditioned to follow a 'moral code' capable of such acts, seems to be the suggestion.
No, it does in lot more subtle ways.Quote:
I didn't feel Nola in MP was anywhere near as well fleshed out.
There's a lot more sexual tension suggested here. Scarlett Johansson vs Emily Mortimer - Is this even a contest?
And the real devils of inherent immorality when they have sex by the fields.
A less intellectual person wanting to stick on to his wealthy, highbrow lifestyle. He 'acts' a lot in his marriage while he is himself with her.
Unlike MP, characters in WA films who are lesser intellectuals, are the ones who are given progressive arcs when they learn the capacity to ruminate in in philosophy, literature, history & arts. But in MP, the person 'acts' his way to enjoy the affluent lifestyle. But not necessarily takes in to the intellectual leanings as the means to realize the meaning(lessness) of life. He is already aware of this. He doesn't need extra credentials. But there are other WA characters (of that intellectual stature) are persuaded to earn it & they feel good about themselves in this progression. Female characters in general. And they use up Woody in this process.
Isn't that part of the problem?Quote:
And the Woody-Mia Farrow story is also exactly about the intellectual match business. It is not a pure/non-judgmental love (is there anything like that?).Woody is in no social position to cheat on his wife! Yet that is what he tries to do. He also thinks his wife is no match for him. He thinks nearly as poorly of her as thinks of Alda- who is shown to be his 'superior' not just in the 'ways of the world' but also in terms of 'poetry reading'!! So - if only he were not that endearing and relatable a character - we can judge him pretty harshly for putting the moves on Mia Farrow. And we see right before our eyes she is going to smash his hopes and headed exactly in the feared direction. In the end Woody's character does climb his high and lonely moral ground.
Again, there's a clearly defined nebbish anxiety that he explores. That would be best served in a different film.
What kind of meta- ness do you derive by contrasting this intellectual match/conflict to the other one (Which is patched up like a serious examination of crime)? Not a lot.
More importantly, like Rosenbaum, I didn't feel it was justified to lack seriousness of a sex victim (in a way, Huston is too, exploited by Landau), where the sole aim was to let Woody contemplate human sexuality is so mysterious, a nice trademark one-liner. But isn't that deep in itself.
Woody's parts serves a tragicomical function. Exposition by Alda made it obvious. Woody being a musician would understand the role of playing different keys & tones to make a more accessible, entertaining film. I get that.
Which wasn't done in a sophisticated manner in MP. There's not much of in-joke quotient here as in his other films. This is where I agree with Queenan. His recent films suffer a lot more. The early films had Woody channeling his Jewish nebbish prototype who tries to make up for his lack of physicality with (pseudo-)intellectual posturing.Quote:
And for the charges of "highbrow posturing" (I don't think I fully understand what you are agreeing with k-g), Allen has always made fun of it from inside, no? In C&M for instance, Woody's character is shown to be one with a disproportionately bloated ego.
There are several places where he does this. VCB for example - the famous v/o in the picnic scene - he talks about the free spirit of Europe :lol: That's a bloody mockery of the feel of the movie! The girls are enjoying a European vacation, we think we are enjoying a European movie. But by mere tongue-in-cheek mention he all he makes us think that perhaps the girls just think they are drinking in Europe, and by extension, so are we! End of the vacation, we have to pack our bags and come home and be our confused, restricted selves.
Yes, his people seem to believe 'a good life is art-appreciation based'. And they are - the funny ones atleast - anxious about having opinions about them. But by simply presenting these clamorous, clumsy individuals Woody seems to be repeatedly saying life is elsewhere (the wordless Opera scene in Manhattan - what excellence)
In Interiors, he has the husband talk about being afraid of his anger after he wrote a caustic review of his friend's book. Is he is he afraid his opinions are more important to him than his relationships or is he afraid, he is overbalancing to ensure that is not the case? Who is to say? Isn't this quite close to the problem of the intellectual who can't date a girl who believes in sun-signs?
But there are judgmental attitudes involved which essentially trivializes a less simplistic being. I obviously don't look for that in a WA film, because I know it serves many functions. At times, it's perfectly woven like 'life is elsewhere' perspective that you've mentioned. But not all films get accounted like that.
I watched part I of the documentary. I'd say there's enough truth to a school-dropout name-throwing Kierkegaard & Dostoevsky without 'em serving a more nuanced function.
Agreed on this.Quote:
That's a little uncharitable. ennamO ippo dhaan graduate aana maadhiri.
But what he's trying to suggest is that MP tells the story in a much more refined way. More importantly, it manages to highlight the crime & makes one feel for the mistress (Despite her own questionable morality & misdemeanors) & the neighbor. It also manages to make the crime a direct implication & not detached. In these respects, WA evokes the real problems of humanity. He makes less compromises, by his own admission.
Exactly. To make these parallels feel equal is itself so 'wrong'. And I think that is very intentionally done by Woody. As Kaufman would say: I'm solipsistic, I'm pathetic.Quote:
Originally Posted by k_g
Of course the sister's abuse experience is largely a joke. But part of the joke is that Woody is only superficially interested in that. He is concerned only about his own 'petty' issues. "My crimes are misdemeanors, the misdemeanors that happen to me are crimes' vice versa for others" is how I made sense of the whole film.
Which is why I was pretty disappointed with Woody making short work of his track in the film.
Grown kids, presenting exercise cycle and all. Respectable people he has over for dinner, the decor of the house (pertinent 'ngrEn). It is unimaginable for him to have the world know he was bonking an airhostess. Adulterous affair with a wife's friend or friend's wife is something else. Revealing would have been a breach too gross.Quote:
Landau's seems harmonious & manageable.
..
He could have exposed it & stood a good chance of holding on to the family.
But you are right, I understand, objectively speaking that it wasn't suggested too clearly. I am just a reading a lot because I like this film and Jonah's situation too much.
:lol: equa, engirundhaalum mEdaikku varavum.Quote:
There's always a part in him that inherently desires to be amoral. Maybe it's in the DNA. The brother is a goon.
Well..never mind.Quote:
There's a lot more sexual tension suggested here. Scarlett Johansson vs Emily Mortimer - Is this even a contest?
The affair in C&M is about power, than about youthful passions. Here it's not the asexuality of the wife, but the seeming expectation of a certain 'acting your age' asexuality expected of him. oor periya manushan -naalE asexual creature dhaanE.
Didn't get this one.Quote:
And the real devils of inherent immorality when they have sex by the fields.
This 'throw caution to the winds' moment didn't work for me. Perpetually cautious Rhys-Myers swept off his feet - is what it is supposed to be. A union where finally the palpable tension built that far was finally relieved. I could see what Woody was trying to do, but it didn't work that way for me. May have a lot to do with my scant estimation of Ms.Johansson's attractiveness.
Yes. His lies and simple-duplicity are the reasons why this affair-situations compares less favourably to the C&M.Quote:
He 'acts' a lot in his marriage while he is himself with her.
In MP I didn't find myself rooting for Rhys-Myers. Even though I am quite supportive of shooting Ms.Johansson.
And that was a very good touch methought.Quote:
MP, the person 'acts' his way to enjoy the affluent lifestyle. But not necessarily takes in to the intellectual leanings as the means to realize the meaning(lessness) of life. He is already aware of this. He doesn't need extra credentials.
And he is not talking survival. He willing to play-act for the lifestyle. What would you rather do, when you don't know what you would want instead?
Yeah. The night-school cultural improvement stuff. But far from it being something to criticize Woody about, he has always shown the emptiness of that, right? He says that quite directly, no:Quote:
But there are other WA characters (of that intellectual stature) are persuaded to earn it & they feel good about themselves in this progression. Female characters in general. And they use up Woody in this process.
Alvy Singer being happy about Annie taking her boyfriend to 'Sorrow and the Pity'.
Or is portraying that as the intellectual equivalent of a makeover itself objectionable?
Hmm I am not so sure. As I said above, his problems being nothing in comparisons to the murder IS the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by k-g
Actually Nola is a poor thing. There is not much to question her morality about, right? Her boyfriend's mother gives her a pretty hard time, she is flopping auditions, she is the other misfit in the #posh family but Woody makes you sympathize with her predicament. Particularly when contrasting with the pretending rat Rhys-Myers is.Quote:
Originally Posted by k_g
Consequently it makes it impossible for anyone to sympathize with Myers. The film doesn't aim to either I guess. But when the doctor feels the heaviness of having snuffed out a life in C&M, you really feel it. The revisiting the crime scene moment, he is simultaneously disturbed by what he has done (still corpse of someone who so recently was a threat) simultaneously removing the evidence. That split when you indulge yourself in self-pity, remorse and without batting an eyelid indulge in self-preservation - I found that highly impressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by k-g
I actually think C&M is more human in this respect. There is an element of self-deception (finally you deceive/convince yourself well enough, you are home and dry) is very well handled here.Quote:
Originally Posted by k-g
vayasaana kaalathula summA illaama pEtti kudukkuraar. inimE ennai kEttuttu dhaan pEsanumnu sollap pOrEn.Quote:
Originally Posted by k-g
In C&M, the deception is possible because it's handled in a compromised manner. That we feel more for Landau is problematic. What if he was directly involved in the murder & then earns the sympathy? Not having to let his brother's hitman to get the job done? What if he didn't have a loving family & had to leave it all for aging air-hostess, who uses his financial misappropriation for blackmail purposes? That would be a real challenge.
The film makes a case that the moral compass is in itself self-deception. Landau coming out of that guilt sort of shunts the extended feeling at crime scene.
Quote:
To make these parallels feel equal is itself so 'wrong'. And I think that is very intentionally done by Woody. As Kaufman would say: I'm solipsistic, I'm pathetic.
Of course the sister's abuse experience is largely a joke. But part of the joke is that Woody is only superficially interested in that. He is concerned only about his own 'petty' issues. "My crimes are misdemeanors, the misdemeanors that happen to me are crimes' vice versa for others" is how I made sense of the whole film.
I'd prefer if the feelings were reserved more for the real victims than the self-absorbed loser. The precedence matters (not unless the film wants to address the problematic attitudes of the audience having to side with the upperclass/middlerclass, both intellectual & social*). Mechanics of C&M so clearly works against that. OTOH, MP is able to tell the story but define proper boundaries that wouldn't problematize. Not have to use the murder to contrast the pettiness of one man, or more directly serve as means to show up the morality that we create for ourselves (& give an expository ending with both adulterous men, one sexual & other intellectual, ruminating.).Quote:
His problems being nothing in comparisons to the murder IS the point.
Nola having sex with Meyers character did strike as immoral & deplorable to me. It seemed that their physical union was a way to offset & release the hassles of having to 'conform' to the highbrow. It worked on that plane to me.
* - I'd revisit C&M more, wanting to identify & feel for Woody's character, Landau's character. But it's exactly this that makes one guilty as charged. IF Woody wants to show that this is wrong, he failed. MP is less problematic & less self-absorbed. More unsettling, less backpatting & less didactic. It's mechanics as a thriller and the visual choices (off-camera violence, Meyers shooting at the screen) shows masterful sensibilities of WA. The element of luck as events unfold deciding one's implication. And it didn't need a philosopher's v-o over a montage!
Thilak, thanks for the link. Tried to read the following discussions between you and PR, but got cross-eyed instead. Irumbadikkira idattula... Parava illa, innoru nAl varen.
By the way, do you know that there comic strips based on him? Here's the creator talking about it, with loads of advice from Woody on writing/creating. Love this para:
Working with Woody was smooth sailing: he was modest, efficient, dependable, focused, loyal, generous, incisive, serious, and witty. But quietly so. Even when an archetypal Allen quip slips out, there are no eye-rolls, no grandstanding, no bada-boom. He doesn't hang out with comics, he doesn't seek the limelight at awards shows, he doesn't demand his name above the title. He also has incredibly clean hands.