Sign in to follow this  
LornaHansonForbes

Woody Allen has been shelved

138 posts in this topic

On 2/8/2019 at 1:37 PM, GGGGerald said:

I hope he sues and wins. This is like the production code all over again. Trying to prevent portraying something that happens everyday.

Now, we don't like it. And would rather it not happen. I think the film would shine a light on a sensitive issue. I am always in favor of freedom of the arts over restriction.

I'm sure there are other streaming services that would show the film.

 

 

Thank you, Gerald !  I so agree with you, especially the part in your statement that I bolded. Personally, I have no trouble separating the art from the artist, and wish all this retroactive judging and rejection of films, music, and other works of art or entertainment whose creators may have done or said questionable things (especially as perceived in today's environment) would cease. 

If things continue the way they're going, there will be very little left of anything made before 2014 to watch or listen to or enjoy.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 2:26 PM, NickAndNora34 said:

I haven't seen this one; thanks! I'll give it a try :) 

Be warned, NickandNora, that, while everything Gershwin Fan says about it is true, it also depicts one of those "May-December " relationships. Woody (at the time, age 60), plays opposite Helen Hunt (at the time, age 36). Now 36 is much different from 16 or even 26, but still, you see the age difference so clearly, it is a bit off-putting.

However, it's a nice little movie, and as Gershwin fan says, an affectionate homage to those kinds of mystery movies they made back in the day, the era so many of us here love.

...By the way, I don't want people to think I like or don't mind  that aspect of those movies Allen made where the male character is at least twice the age of the female character he is romantically involved with. I, too, think it's a bit yucky. I just don't let it stop me from watching or enjoying his films. If the movie's good, I like it despite that "creep" factor. If it isn't (and quite of few of Woody's films are sub-par) then I dislike it on the film's merits or lack of same, not because of a "creepy" age difference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 6:31 PM, TikiSoo said:

Was that the one where Tea Leoni falls in love with Woody? 

Everything was good except that "fantasy" ending.

No, I believe you're thinking of Hollywood Ending, which in my opinion is one of the worst movies Woody ever made. (and it, too, has Woody playing the romantic lead against a much younger woman - as you say, Tea Leoni.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 10:02 PM, calvinnme said:

Very much like the Puritans of New England - dour, humorless, lacking in forgiveness, eager to turn into an unperson and erase all past accomplishments of anybody who breaches their fundamentalist religion of political correctness.

Thank  you, calvinme, very well said !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 2:03 PM, LornaHansonForbes said:

I wonder how many ALLEN films are running as part of 31 DAYS?

(For the record, not complaining or against their being aired, just curious.)

They nearly always trot out HANNAH AND HER SISTERS for OSCAR month and that is one that I definitely cannot watch anymore.

I also wonder when the last time they showed MANHATTAN was...(it is one that gets referenced in the comments on a lot of news articles about Allen. I've never seen it, but I admit I have always foudn the subject matter very distasteful. Compounded with the fact that Mariel Hemingway not too long ago alleged that Allen tried to book them in a hotel room together for the European junket of the film.

Ok, Manhattan I can understand your not wanting to watch (although personally I think it's a great movie, even though, yes, I too find the relationship with the very young Mariel uncomfortable and inappropriate).

But what's your problem with Hannah and Her Sisters ? I'm going to come right out and risk offending a lot of posters  here by saying that Hannah and Her Sisters is one of my very favourite movies. Not just one of my favourite Woody Allen movies, one of my favourite movies, period.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 2:19 PM, rayban said:

The latest allegations come from Babi Christina Engelhardt - she was 16, Woody was 41, when they began their affair.

Their affair lasted for more than four years.

She says that the teenage character in "Manhattan" is a composite of several young women.

She has written two unpublished memoirs about the affair. 

 

 

Doesn't the word "allegation" mean a charge of something illegal or at least "bad" ?  I don't think that's an appropriate word to use in the case of Ms Engelhardt. She was quite happy to be in that relationship with Woody Allen and in fact, as far as I can tell, she was the one who initiated it. Hardly comparable to say, a Harvey Weinstein allegation.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, misswonderly3 said:

Ok, Manhattan I can understand your not wanting to watch (although personally I think it's a great movie, even though, yes, I too find the relationship with the very young Mariel uncomfortable and inappropriate).

But what's your problem with Hannah and Her Sisters ? I'm going to come right out and risk offending a lot of posters  here by saying that Hannah and Her Sisters one of my very favourite movies. Not just one of my favourite Woody Allen movies, one of my favourite movies, period.

I thought about you when I wrote that about HANNAH AND HER SISTERS because I remember you're a big fan- It's a good movie, maybe even a great one (been a while since I saw it)- I just can't watch it 100% because of all the real life ugliness that has followed it, not because of anything wrong with the film itself.

so, nothing to do with the performances or script or anything like that, it just makes me sad to see-in a sense- a family a few years before it was torn apart forever. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, misswonderly3 said:

Doesn't the word "allegatrion" mean a charge of something illegal or at least "bad" ?  I don't think that's an appropriate word to use in the case of Ms Engelhardt. She was quite happy to be in that relationship with Woody Allen and in fact, as far as I can tell, she was the one who initiated it. Hardly comparable to say, a Harvey Weinstein allegation.

When Ms. Engelhardt started their relationship, she was not "of legal age".

Yes, she initiated it, but she was only 16.

He knew that she was not "legal".

But a dog is a dog is a dog.

He is a very complicated - but very talented - man.

Whenever I see one of his films, I am astonished by his unique sensibility.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 2:32 PM, rayban said:

It is so hard to separate the artist and his life.

I do make the effort, though.

I believe Dylan Farrow then and now.

I believe Mia Farrow.

Mr. Allen is a predator - and a creep.

Have you seen him in "To Rome, With Love"?

His creepiness is - so very visible.

 

How is he "creepy" in To Rome with Love? The woman who plays his wife in that film is age appropriate (Judy Davis), and Woody's character in the film is far more interested in making a middle-aged Italian gentleman into an opera star than in pursuing any young girls.

As for "separating the artist and his life", I have no trouble with it at all. I just know how much great art I'd miss out on if I didn't.

(An exception: if I heard any filmmaker or writer or musician was some kind of serial murderer, I'd have to rethink this approach.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 2:33 PM, rayban said:

How can it end?

Mr. Allen has quite a past.

Yes, it is quite a past. A past which includes some hilarious comedy and some of the funniest, wisest movies ever made.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, kingrat said:

Manhattan is worth seeing for several reasons. ...Then there is, yes, Mariel Hemingway, who, according to me, gives the most annoying performance ever nominated for an Oscar.

Um, JENNIFER TILLY in BULLETS OVER BROADWAY would like a (ear-splitting) word with you...

jennifer-tilly-bullets-over-broadway-1.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...the one WOODY ALLEN film that I have not seen that I would verymuch  like to is CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS (1989), for a variety of reasons.

I don't think it ever runs on TCM, although they could show it as part of 31 days, I know at least Martin Landau got nominated for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me, but while I venerate Woody Allen as an artist, he is, as he gets older, the essence of creepiness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, misswonderly3 said:

Yes, it is quite a past. A past which includes some hilarious comedy and some of the funniest, wisest movies ever made.

I am not disparaging his very real talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

...the one WOODY ALLEN film that I have not seen that I would verymuch  like to is CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS (1989), for a variety of reasons.

I don't think it ever runs on TCM, although they could show it as part of 31 days, I know at least Martin Landau got nominated for it.

You should seek it out. It's one of his best, IMO.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, misswonderly3 said:

Doesn't the word "allegation" mean a charge of something illegal or at least "bad" ?  I don't think that's an appropriate word to use in the case of Ms Engelhardt. She was quite happy to be in that relationship with Woody Allen and in fact, as far as I can tell, she was the one who initiated it. Hardly comparable to say, a Harvey Weinstein allegation.

rayban, what is it about my post that you find confusing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, misswonderly3 said:

rayban, what is it about my post that you find confusing?

I've already answered your question.

At the start of the affair, she was not technically "legal".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, rayban said:

I've already answered your question.

At the start of the affair, she was not technically "legal".

As you know, in most states,  by definition,  someone 16 years or younger can't initiate a sexual encounter.   I.e. they can't grant consent.   

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first ALLEN film I ever saw was SLEEPER on CINEMAX ca. 1992 when I was 12. I thought it was HILARIOUS, especially the KILLER PUDDING SCENE. I only recentlyish rewatched it and did not find it quite as funny, but it's still funny: as is THE KILLER PUDDING SENE, WHICH WILL NEVER NOT BE FUNNY.

Then in 1994, post-ESCANDALO! I watched BULLETS OVER BROADWAY sometime after it was nominated for a pile of Oscars and for which Diane Wiest won Supporting Actress AND, WHILE IT HAS BEEN 25ISH(!) years since then, I have a pretty distinct recollection of haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaating it.

Like, I guess it's been two-decades and I should re-assess it, but oh...wow, it was a burning hatred.

I also remember seeing the film and saying, at 16, "he did this film to excuse his behavior. the moral of the movie is that an artist is a special person who lives above the law and breaking the law, in the name of art and discovery, is allowable for CERTAIN artists."

which, no.

JENNIFER TILLY also sucks on toast in this.

And then I saw, and thought the same thing, about EVERYONE SAYS I LOVE YOU (1996) (edit- except JENNIFER TILLY thankfully is not in that one, although DREW BARRYMORE is as bad, if not worse.)

It's only been in the last 10-15 years that I've seen ANNIE HALL and ZELIG and RADIO DAYS and HANNAH AND HER SISTERS, and I get that those are all legit good movies and not everything he ever made has been about nebbish old intellectual Nudniks dating girls way out of their age range and league. 

But BULLETS OVER BROADWAY suuuuucks and that is a hill that I will gladly die on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

You should seek it out. It's one of his best, IMO.

AMAZON PRIME heres I come...

(I need to prioritize MY SON JOHN while I can tho)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, rayban said:

When Ms. Engelhardt started their relationship, she was not "of legal age".

Yes, she initiated it, but she was only 16.

He knew that she was not "legal".

But a dog is a dog is a dog.

He is a very complicated - but very talented - man.

Whenever I see one of his films, I am astonished by his unique sensibility.

So what? I don't get this prudish puritanical obsession with teenage girls having sex with older men  - -IF it's the teenage girl who initiated or wanted the relationship in the first place. I draw the line at 14, but anything older than that, the person is a thinking human being who is free to make her own choices.

I remember there was huge disapproval against David Bowie (another great artist who undeservedly has had dirt heaped on him - and he's not even alive now to defend himself) after some woman wrote an article about how she and Bowie had an affair, which began when she was 14 or 15. Bowie did not ask her what her age was, and she was happy he didn't. She says she has no regrets to this day.

Our society now has really jumped upon this whole "teenagers should never have sex with older adults" thing. I agree, if there's a situation where the teen is reluctant or is having sex forced on her (or him) and the adult is using/abusing some kind of power over the teen, it's unethical at best, and should be illegal.

But there are many situations where the teenager wants to have a relationship or even just casual sex with the adult, (in the case of the Bowie story, it was the girl who pursued Bowie, not the other way round). We talk as though these young people are not capable of making their own choices. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

But, for me, a teenager - a boy or girl - should not be having sex before they are barely out of puberty.

I'd make the legal age of consent - at least 18. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, misswonderly3 said:

Thank you, Gerald !  I so agree with you, especially the part in your statement that I bolded. Personally, I have no trouble separating the art from the artist, and wish all this retroactive judging and rejection of films, music, and other works of art or entertainment whose creators may have done or said questionable things (especially as perceived in today's environment) would cease. 

If things continue the way they're going, there will be very little left of anything made before 2014 to watch or listen to or enjoy.

I agree with this.  It's tiresome to have someone's name smeared through the mud for something they supposedly did in 1985.  Yes. If they did whatever, they shouldn't have. Save for something horrific like being a serial killer, or something deplorable, why should someone's Twitter posts from 2011 be dredged up for the sake of ruining whatever project they're working on.  There are people out there going out of their way to find every skeleton in everyone's closet.  

I have no issue with separating someone's art from their past.  E.g. I still like Kevin Spacey's work despite whatever things he may or may not have done in his personal life.  I will admit that I do find The Cosby Show a bit hard to swallow considering the crimes for which Bill Cosby was tried and found guilty.  But the show is entertaining. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

It's only been in the last 10-15 years that I've seen ANNIE HALL and ZELIG and RADIO DAYS and HANNAH AND HER SISTERS, and I get that those are all legit good movies and not everything he ever made has been about nebbish old intellectual Nudniks dating girls way out of their age range and league. 

But BULLETS OVER BROADWAY suuuuucks and that is a hill that I will gladly die on.

I like both Bullets Over Broadway and Everyone Says I Love You. But I'm a fan of his work, to the point that I have all of them on disc. The first one that I saw the I didn't like was September (1987), but I've grown to appreciate that one more since. I've seen all but the most recent few more than once, I should add. 

There are several that I didn't like much on first viewing but have warmed to at least a little bit since: Alice (1990), Shadows and Fog (1991), Small Time Crooks (2000), Scoop (2006).

And there are some that I disliked the first time, and continue to not like: Hollywood Ending (2002), Cafe Society (2016), and Anything Else (2003), the last of which I rank as his worst.

I'm not saying I love the rest, but they are at least pretty good, in my opinion, and have one or more redeeming qualities (performances, cinematography, funny or compelling situations).

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us