Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: Deconstructing Harry (1997)

Then Deconstructing Harry was one of the first films I saw at the Cornerhouse in Manchester. It was before the refurbishment when they still had those puffy blue chairs. I remember that though the cinema was quite full I was the only one laughing at the jokes and heard someone complain about the prostitute character on the way out. Whilst it’s true that it took until 1997 for Woody to put a black person in a major role and then made her a tart with a heart, I’m willing to accept that it wasn’t some kind of deliberate racism, that it was, as he’s said, that the kinds of characters he was writing about (at the time) and the circles they move in don’t interact with black people too much, other than as servants and maids. Manhattan is a very different place. See also Six Degrees of Separation.

Now I’ve seen reviews that suggest Deconstructing Harry is/was Woody’s last great film. I don’t agree for reasons that will become apparent but I can understand why someone might come to that conclusion. Employing Derrida’s theories related to “deconstruction” Allen creates a kind of greatest hits compilation that applies some of his usual metaphysical and post-modern noodlings to an idea that reiterates Bergman’s Wild Strawberries (a man travels to his old school so that he can be honoured for his work -- it's his road movie) but with a bilious, foul-mouthed, morally suspect, sexist figure at the centre of the story with topped off with anger and semetic angst. It couldn’t be more of Woody Allen film if it tried, except very, very dark.

When I was putting together my first MA dissertation proposal, I chose Deconstructing Harry as one of the films because it seemed to parallel the director’s own life, as I said in the proposal, “utilises a fluid combination of the approaches seen in these earlier films in the story of a novelist thinly fictionalising incidents from his own life some of which are portrayed in fantasy sequences and moments in which the character is addressed by the fictional constructs themselves.” In other words, I was suggesting that Woody was commenting on his own seeming proclivity for apparently including biographical elements in his own films, thinly disguised. The ensuing dissertation would no doubt have included a section in which I ploughed through his biography pointing out parallels in the films themselves.

Now, I’m not as convinced. Now, having watched all of these films so intensively, I think that he has in fact deliberately emphasised the fantasy that’s developed around him, or rather done nothing at least in the films to deny the truthfulness or lack of it. If you think that Annie Hall or Manhattan are basically romanticised documentaries, that’s fine. I think Deconstructing Harry is playing on the public’s expectation that, for example, Husbands and Wives is a thinly disguised portrayal of the unfortunate incident when in reality it was written months beforehand and was to an extent self-fulfilling prophecy. He’s content to let people enjoy the fictional version of his persona even if it bares little or no similarity to the reality, at least in terms of story. In fact, until Albert Brooks suggested he play the role himself, Woody had sought him, Dennis Hopper, Dustin Hoffman and Elliot Gould for Harry.

From what I can see, the film which bares the most similarity to Woody’s life is Radio Days, but even then, though the characters are clearly inspired by his real parents and extended family, they were really just an inspiration and no more so than the average writer or filmmaker. But if you read the Bjorkman interviews and his other writings on the subject, he’s always very clear, this is not my biography. He has, after all, made just as many films with fantastical elements and high concepts. Perhaps there is a psychoanalytical approach to studying Zelig as a way to suggest that Woody himself has a chameleon-like personality, or some such, but after watching Wild Man Blues, and hearing Soon-Yi’s speech patterns, it is more likely to be the other way round. I’ve certainly been gesticulating more since I began watching these films.

Deconstructing Harry seems more like a homage to his old short plays and prose which were published in the late 70s and early 80s, tiny sketches with a punchline. A less scrupulous director might have simply decided to recreate some of those, but instead he presents a range of new ones which only his character could have written and then blurs the lines by placing that character within them to signal how biographical they may be until he eventually gives up the pretence and sends him to hell. Which isn’t to say they’re not at least influenced by what’s gone before – the appearance of Death (see also Love & …) in the mistaken identity segment with Tobey Maguire.

It also allows him to employ a massive, showy cast once again within a relatively short running time and present the spectacle of Demi Moore who was just on the edge of career disaster but still a big name effectively understudying Kirstie Alley and Robin Williams walking around totally out of focus amongst so many other things. It would be very easy for me to do the usual and become over excited about this list of names, but its notable to see Muriel Hemmingway in her second and only other appearance in a Woody Allen film since her iconic turn in Manhattan, Jennifer Garner in a tiny role understudying Elizabeth Shue and Paul Giamatti standing as close as he can to Woody in the closing moments. It’s amazing that thirteen years later we’re still waiting for him to be the star of one of Woody’s films …