You may only read this site if you've purchased Our Kampf from Amazon or Powell's or me
• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show

"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket

"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming

November 21, 2006

Finally Someone Has The Guts To Tell The Truth

"Yes, the vast majority of global orgasm coordinations have been firmly rooted in San Francisco."

On another subject, I just saw Match Point for the first time. One of the people with whom I watched it observed she was enjoying it a great deal, but couldn't tell whether that was because it was a good movie or because seeing Woody Allen's ten previous movies had been like having your nose sanded off, and Match Point at least wasn't that. In other words, Match Point might be like the blessed silence when a car alarm twenty feet from your bedroom finally stops going off at 3 a.m. You love it, but because it's the absence of distressing sound rather than the presence of beautiful music.

When she said this I realized I was experiencing exactly the same confusion. I truly did like Match Point, but I have no idea whether it was a good movie or simply not a nose-sandingly bad one. I hope someone can help me out here.

Posted at November 21, 2006 10:26 AM | TrackBack

Ah, yes, I thought it was a good movie. Even though you have to spend an hour and a half just to let him connect the scenes with the ball bouncing over the net and the ring hitting the handrail (or whatever it was). But the stuff in-between is not bad either.

I find the whole thing very Nabokov-ish.

Posted by: abb1 at November 21, 2006 11:01 AM

I liked Match Point, but it was ultimately just a retread of Allen's Crimes and Misdemeanors, which I feel is a far superior film--more believable characters, deeper in its analysis of the moral dimension of the crimes, and a better cast (I'm not a Scarlett Johansson fan, and though Jonathan Rhys Meyers gave a good performance I think it suffered from the general odiousness of his character).

Also, when you say "previous ten movies" you're including Sweet and Lowdown, which is IMO one of Allen's best. Was that intentional?

Posted by: John Caruso at November 21, 2006 11:24 AM

>> I'm not a Scarlett Johansson fan

I am a big fan. Ok, she can't act.
But, sheesh, what do you expect?
She's only an actress, you know!

Posted by: Bernard Chazelle at November 21, 2006 12:18 PM

While I take your point, Jonathan, I actually didn't like Match Point at all. As I never felt obligated to see all (or even most) of Woody's previous movies, I didn't benefit from the 'lack of noise' effect either.

I do agree with John's view of Sweet and Lowdown. I also believe that Take the Money and Run, Sleeper, Annie Hall, and Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex had their moments.

Tony C.

Posted by: Tony C. at November 21, 2006 12:19 PM

Your musings about Woody Allen are interesting in light of the passing today of Robert Altman. Both men are artists and giants, and each has films that, while despised by most "critics," still have their cult followings.

Woody Allen's funny, serious, surreal, and self indulgent films all seem to age well. Bananas, Love and Death, Stardust Memories, Purple Rose of Cairo, Radio Days, Broadway Danny Rose, Bullets Over Broadway, Manhattan are near great. The greats are Play it Again Sam, Annie Hall, Hannah and Her Sisters and the aforementioned Crimes and Misdemeanors. This even neglects Interiors, September, and Woman Under the Influence. In his early films he and Mel Brooks were compared as funny men who couldn't finish films. This was many years ago. Today the great living American directors are, now that Altman is gone, Allen and Scorsese. They are directors whose films must be seen, even when they are not so great. Because even then they are better than 90% of the alternative. In closing, I didn't like Match Point either, but it is still young.

Posted by: at November 21, 2006 05:57 PM

"A Woman Under the Influence" was not made by Woody Allen. That was John Cassavetes.

Posted by: En Ming Hee at November 21, 2006 11:03 PM

Life is too short to watch Woody Allen films, by my reckoning.

Also, in response to a commenter, the greatest American director working today is Jim Jarmusch.  This much should be obvious.

Posted by: Dayv at November 22, 2006 07:48 AM