Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: Alice (1990)

Then The first time I read about Alice was in the late, somewhat lamented Starburst Magazine who seemed quite surprised to be covering a Woody Allen film but were polite and lengthy all the same with a giant picture of Mia filling three quarters of a page. When I finally saw the film as part of the HMV splurge of 1994, I was bored, although I think I did have a cold at the time. One should never watch films for the first time when you’re running a fever. It’s not fair to them.

Now We’re through the looking glass now people, just over halfway through this adventure. As I may have mentioned, I’m tending to watch, through Lovefilm, the movies that the BFI are programming in a given month and in March they’ve scheduled, because of the Tim Burton 3D spectacular, adaptations and films influenced by Alice In Wonderland. From my vague memory I’d wondered why Woody’s film wasn’t included, given the potions and ghostly goings on.

Showing the BFI’s keen curatorial sensibilities, the reason this film wasn’t included (unless it was because of print availability) is that though Alice enters a new emotional wonderland aided by the herbs with their fantastical properties, the icons of Lewis Carroll’s story aren’t included. There isn’t a white rabbit exactly. Some people are seen playing cards and Alec Baldwin’s ghost has a Cheshire cat grin. But if Mia’s character was called Mildred, the audience might not make a direct connection.

In fact, now that I turn as ever to the Bjorkman interview, he actively distances himself from Carroll, stating that he chose Alice because it’s “a quintessential kind of rich WASPy name” and it might as well have been Leslie. Woody instead explains that he was trying to make a comic version of Another Woman, with the device of listening in (this time through invisibility) as the way of provoking the character to change her life after viewing her so-called friends and position from the outside.

That allows him to finally give Mia a proper starring role in which she’s allowed to offer the wide range of emotions that she was always obviously capable of but generally only allowed to offer one character at a time. Across the film, via the herbs, Alice becomes a seductress, adultress, gossip, horrendously stoned and finally as feminine as she’s perhaps ever been. Mia is one of my small revelations during the process; far from the repellent slightly winy figure I’d remembered, she’s funny, resilient and at times incredibly sexy. And that’s just in this film.

She’s ably supported by the men, but Woody is careful never to let them take over, with understandable exception of Keye Luke as Mr. Yang, her spiritual guide who’s hypnotic voice drives her forward. If William Hurt at times seems like he’s wandered in from an Adrian Lynne domestic revenge thriller, Joe Mantegna is incredible, demonstrating how underused he’s been across his career playing dozens of mafia figures. His speechless reaction to Alice’s advances is one of his best ever scenes. When Woody says that half his directing is done in the casting, this is the kind of film which demonstrates what that means.

There are other casting surprises. Baldwin (in the same year as Hunt For Red October) appears as the ghostly presence of one of Mia past lovers, offering relationship to advice to Mia just as Bogart did for Allan in Play It Again, Sam. A post-Moonlighting Cybill Shepherd has a tiny role as a tv producer. This is Bernadette Peters’s only appearance in a Woody Allen film as a Muse (“Very deep is exactly where he wants to put it”). At one point a famous model is pointed out, she turns around, and it’s Elle McPhereson. Even Bob Balaban is in there somewhere towards the end. It’s also a good film for Woody ensemble watchers with Julie Kavner cameoing, Blythe Danner and the first appearance from Judy Davis.

As you can tell from all these paragraphs I’m quite enamoured with Alice (and its casting). It’s not his best film; it’s at least ten minutes too long and Carlo Di Palma is back behind the camera with his very long takes which make some scenes drag a bit. The orientalist “other” approach to Far Eastern culture is a shame but in vogue at the time (see Gremlins and Blade Runner). But as an attempt to inject magic and fantasy into what theorist Molly Haskell called “women’s films” and offer a third way at the conclusion from the usual climax of such things as marriage or oblivion it has to be applauded.

Alice was seriously underrated. By me.

Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: Crimes and Misdemeanors (1989)

Then Another Friday evening Leeds Metropolitan University viewing. In 1993, I think. Even then I could see that in producing a film every year Woody had developed a system of larger budget pieces with large casts and smaller chamber works, somehow managing to deal with huge themes on different scales. Spoilers ahead. Spoilers!

Now In Crimes and Misdemeanors, rather like the old sitcom Dream On, Woody employs old film clips to comment directly on the action, to show the differences and similarities between “fiction” and “reality”. His first and most interesting choice is Hitchcock’s Mr & Mrs Smith, which as we saw last year was that director’s only, not particularly successful, attempt at straight romantic comedy. Crimes is about similar genre games, devoting near equal screen time to a late Hitchcockian thriller and a romantic comedy and seeing if they can exist within the same universe.

In the Bjorkman interview Woody says that like Hannah and Her Sisters, he was being influenced by novels and mentions Tolstoy as a standard. But his experimentation goes deeper than that because he looks to see if it’s possible for the thriller to have a happy if morally ambiguous ending and the rom com to end in tragedy. Martin Landau’s happily married ophthalmologist Judah is adulterous and gets away with murder; Woody Allen’s unhappily married documentary maker Cliff thinks about adultery (a lot) and is rewarded with divorce, the suicide of his subject and a broken heart. The audience is left intellectually stimulated but not emotionally satisfied.

Something I did notice watching the film in sequence is how the relationship between Landau and Anjelica Houston’s air hostess patterns as the playing out of the Frederick/Lee coupling from Hannah, if she’d been less emotionally stable and he was more arrogant about his position in society. I don’t think Caine’s character was so ethically black that he would have even considered Judah’s “solution” but both films share the existential discussion of what a man is capable of, even if here, the internal discussion reserved for voiceover is played out against a backdrop of dream sequences and the return of the spectres of Another Woman.

Incidentally, this is the last of these three films photographed by Sven Nykvist in sequence. A few days ago, I made the rash statement that all of the cinematographers that followed Gordon Willis were to some extent following his lead. I still stand by that. Nykvist is more free with his camera work and longer scenes do take place in front of a camera which is moving about an environment more than Willis who tended to hold a shot for a period taking in a full space. More close-ups perhaps. But just as when he worked with Bergman the director’s vision had primacy, so the pallet and shapes in these three films aren’t that different. The colour pallet hasn’t shifted outrageously.

Cliff’s resulting hatchet job reminds me of the Yesterday’s Men, the satirical documentary about former PM Harold Wilson which was suppressed, though subsequently clips have been used elsewhere, one of which shows Wilson at a clifftop with a specially commissioned song by the scaffold "Yesterday's Men" playing over the top. Here's the key audio clip. People really don't like to be made fun of in what they think is going to be a serious portrayal, especially if they have no sense of humour about themselves.

Daryl Hannah plays an uncredited role as one of Alda’s conquests. Nora Ephron features in a speaking role and the film ends on voiceover with a series of clips from earlier on – was Woody homaging When Harry Met Sally back again? Crimes also has one of Woody’s best one-liners and certainly the most on the nose since Annie Hall. When his sister suggests that in marriage, “Once the sex goes, it all goes,” Cliff replies, “It’s true. The last time I was inside a woman was when I visited the Statue of Liberty.” If ever one of his jokes developed a life of its own! Often imitated, seldom bettered.

Now, and I’ve been waiting to do this, finally I can ask:

Who’s In It From Doctor Who?

Claire Bloom as Miriam Rosenthal:



Was The Woman/The Doctor's Mother/The Doctor's Daughter/Susan/The Rani/Flavia/Iris Wyldethyme/Jenny/Romana/whoever the hell she was in The End of Time

Liverpool Twestival 2010.

Liverpool Life Last night I attended/visited/went to the Liverpool Twestival which this year/season/month was at the Pan Am bar at the Albert Dock.

A really entertaining evening and even easier than previous gatherings because instead of a sea of unfamiliar faces, there was immediately someone to wave at.

Not that I wasn't still a bit nervous about doing something horrendously embarrassing.

Not that I don't think I entirely managed to get away with it.

Must not wear big heavy shoes again.

Luckily, there were still plenty of new people to shamelessly hand my moo minicards out to.

Entertainment was provided by Man Get Out and later some jazz musicians.

I won a pizza delivery voucher in the raffle, a good enough reason to cheat on my self inflicted cheese ban. I'm trying to lose some weight.

Reports suggest that the event managed to raise over a thousand pounds for the official charity Concern.

Congratulations to @paulinecoxy for organising such a marvellous and relaxed and successful event.

Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: When Harry Met Sally (1989)

Then When Harry Met Sally was the first film I recorded on the Matsui video recorder I was given for Christmas on Boxing Day 1992. That’s the recording I watched incessantly week in and out for years. Imagine my surprise when I finally invested in a sell-thru copy and realised the BBC had snipped the swearing in the argument scene after Harry met Helen over Surry With A Fringe On Top.

It’s one of my favourite films, poster on my wall for nearly a decade, top five, copper bottom, listed in by hundred things about me on this blog and printed on a Moo minicard. No one involved, from Meg Ryan and Billy Crystal to Norah Ephron and Rob Reiner would make a better film and I don’t think that a romantic comedy of this quality has been produced in the past twenty years. It’s miraculous.

Now I haven’t gone mad by the way. I know this isn’t a Woody Allen film exactly in that he had nothing to do with its production, but as a way of extending the entertainment, I’m also including a few films which to an extent have clearly been influenced by Woody’s films to one degree or another.

Stephen J. Spignesi devotes an entire chapter in The Woody Allen Companion (title: “The “Woody Allen Movie” Not Made by Woody Allen” would you believe) to reproducing an article from Premiere magazine in 1989 pointing out the similarities between this film and Allen’s oeuvre, with Spignesi himself offering a few more.



He describes writer Ephron as Woody’s biggest fan and the argument is persuasive. From the credits, which feature white writing on a black background (albeit in the wrong font) to the closing moments which seem to meld elements of Annie Hall (Harry realising he’s in love with Sally during a montage just as Woody did) and Manhattan (running to sweep her off her feet afterwards just as Isaac did for Tracy).

They inhabit similar sonic landscapes with Harry Connick Jr. offering renditions of many of the song which had appeared in Woody’s films, particularly It Had To Be You, whith Diane Keaton sings so touchingly in Annie Hall. Similarly, Sally’s wardrobe has more than a passing resemblance to Annie’s. The overall impression is of an love letter to Woody's films with Diana Keaton.

Ephron also does drops references into her dialogue to people putting their names in books so that they’ll be able to tell who’s is what at the end of a relationship (Annie Hall), to Casablanca and to the ordering of food (Play It Again, Sam). There is an improvisational quality too, with the likes of "pepperrr" made up on the spot (and you can see Meg looking off camera to the crew in embarrassment).



As Spignesi notes, the framing structure, of older couples talking about how they first met, is similar to Take The Money And Run even if they’re not speaking directly about Harry and Sally. And the ravishing shots of the city, from the oranges of Central Park to the modernist concrete of the museums suggest the colour equivalent of what Manhattan achieved.

Some of the connections offered are more tenuous. They both have reading scenes and scenes set in bookstores, characters sharing professions and the repetitions of actions without the other person appearing for melancholic purposes. The former feels more like a coincidence and the latter merely a trope of romantic comedy in general.

I think it’s more clearer to say that When Harry Met Sally, the Woody Allen films and the Neil Simon's are all part of a romantic comedy sub-genre set in the upmarket Autumnal sections of New York set to a jazz soundtrack, amongst people of a particular social class who read similar magazines and attend the same kinds of parties with Sex In The City and Friends the televisual equivalents.

The rhythms of Ephron and Allen’s dialogue are very dissimilar; When Harry Met Sally sounds closer to a Robert Riskin screwball comedy from the 30s, the cultural references more pop culture related and middle brow, television rather than theatre. It’s also shot in more conventional style – Gordon Willis favoured characters in landscapes whereas Barry Sonnenfeld, the photographer here, lets most of the action play out across Meg and Billy’s faces.

Similarly it could be argued that Reiner’s film might not have existed in this form without Manhattan, Annie Hall, even Hannah and Her Sisters providing some of the ground work in presenting New York as a place as potentially romantic as Paris or Venice, except of course that it also ignores the contribution of Neil Simon, especially Barefoot In The Park.

I’m just, having watched the film again in relation to Woody’s career, weary of saying that When Harry Met Sally is “The “Woody Allen Movie” Not Made by Woody Allen” because it’s not.

Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: Somebody or The Rise and Fall of Philosophy (1989)

Then See below.

Now Somebody or The Rise and Fall of Philosophy is a twenty-five minute short film made in Germany by director Axel Hildebrand. According to the imdb (and I think you can see where this is heading) it’s about “gorgeous philosophy student Heather Buttkiss who hires hard-boiled private eye "Kaiser" (="Emperor") Lupowitz to find God (because everyone else in her class will just speculate but she wants to *know*). His investigation leads him to Jewish rabbis, atheistic gangsters, even the Pope himself. But when HE is found murdered, "Kaiser" himself falls under suspicion.”

Woody has a writing credit because it’s based on one of his plays, “Mr Big” which appears in the first collection, Getting Even (1971). I’ve not been able to track down the Hildebrand version, but YouTube offers this rendition of the hiring scene from the North Carolina School of Arts School of Filmmaking featuring what looks like (but obviously isn’t) a twelve year old Simon Pegg:



And if that isn’t enough, here it is again in East European, origin less certain:

Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: New York Stories: Oedipus Wrecks (1989)

Then Fittingly for a film with three different strands, I can think of three distinct times I originally watched New York Stories. At Tris’s flat, at university and during Channel 4’s New York at Christmas season. I can’t remember which was the first. The first section, Life Lessons is in my top three favourite Scorsese films (the others being The Last Temptation of Christ and The Aviator – I’m weird) and I’ve previously waxed lyrical about film editor Thelma Schoonmaker’s contribution here. Coppola’s Life Without Zoe has also been mentioned in relation to the Eloise animations.

Now The New York Stories project was an idea that turned up in a discussion between producer Robert Greenhut and Woody, who was looking for something to cleanse his mental pallet on the back of working so intensively on September and Another Woman. Originally the three directors were to be Allen, Scorsese and Spielberg, but Steven was busy and so Coppolla plugged the gap. True to form, up until the publication of his interview with Bjorkman he hadn’t seen the film, which is a shame because he was missing Nick Nolte’s best performance, Rosanna Arquette looking dazzling (and oddly like a taller Sarah Michelle Gellar) and a rather wonderful evocation of the coping mechanisms of lonely rich kids.

Woody’s end of the film was a product of an idle daydream. He was listening to a Sydney Bechet jazz record one day and wistfully looking towards the sky and wondered about how cool it would be if the soprano saxophonist appeared and filled the city with live music. Then he thought that funnier idea would if it was his mother and all she did all day was nag. Then he thought of the magic show, of her disappearing from an illusionist’s grasp only to have her giant eyes regarding her son’s every move. The stroke of genius in terms of this is portrayed in the film, is that the city is beguiled by her (and her crime fighting abilities) while Woody’s character Sheldon and his fiancé slowly find their world is falling apart as she turns large parts of the New York community against them.

Oedipus Wrecks is (or was – these tenses are becoming increasingly confusing) his outright funniest film since Annie Hall. Of course to an extent that’s by design – romantic comedies by their nature can’t spend all of their time being just funny – but the laugh quotient in this half hour is higher than some films which deliberately go out of their way to be outrageous bursts of glee. Obviously a lot of that has to do with Mae Questel’s delivery as the archetypical mother whose relationship with Sheldon is not unlike Barbara Lott in the Ronnie Corbett sitcom Sorry! emasculating her son at every turn effectively until he finds a nice goy. But Woody’s also on his best form in years, his timing superb as his eye continually roll with the recognition that his mother is in the process of embarrassing him. Again. The moment in which he realises that Julie Kavner’s “psychic” is the woman for him is one of my favourite Woody Allen moments so far.

To be fair and balanced (eep) Stephen Spignesi in The Woody Allen Companion is less thrilled with Wrecks. He speaks of potential squandered, of scenes being too short for the humour to register, the occult rituals with the funny head dresses not being milked nearly enough. And that Mia basically walks through her role though he acknowledges her beauty. Right, Mia first. Whilst its true that Mia’s role isn’t huge and she doesn’t have that much to do, with such a slender running time in fact all she needs to do is to be straight-laced, non-Jewish, a bit unsympathetic and unacceptable to Sheldon’s mother.

The jokes: Spignesi wrote that criticism in the early nineties and I wonder if it’s a product of a time when film comedy and especially gag based film comedy was slower. True, the Airport films were very fast paced, but often the jokes played out within much longer scenes, whereas the cutting in Wrecks is often very swift and perhaps that’s simply become more acceptable in the world of The Fast Show, Family Guy and Robot Chicken when a scene is barely in play before the joke comes and the viewer is faced with another scenario. Over time we’ve learned to appreciate some jokes, even visual, stop being funny once you’ve laughed at the punchline.

Two final bits of casting trivia. The film was Kirsten Dunst's screen debut playing one of Mia's kids (altogether now -- oh bless!). Larry David also features as a theatre manager:

Erm... It looks like the Sugababes project is over for now. In the week when Lada Gaga and the Glee Cast fight for the top slot in the charts (Gaga winning with a travesty of a video), 'Sweet 7' dropped from the top 30. Without plaudits from the music press and further afield (even The Guardian gave them a poor review), it seems the public had little time for this middling electronica. Their time has passed we're sure.

miniblog archive

Library book finally gets returned 45 years late http://ff.im/-hZbFL

Dozier, dozier and dozier http://ff.im/-hZ7sw

Awesome...Dogs Filmed At 1000 Frames Per Second (vid) http://ff.im/-hZ6Qe

Facebook fail – DSGI attempts customer service via fan page http://ff.im/-hVUW3

PIers Wenger took time out from recreating the Whoniverse to school that Indie journo on his approach to previews: http://bit.ly/bufy9H

"I don't care how many hits your shitty blog gets per month." http://bit.ly/dtiTCz

The old stupid protests always seem like the best ones (if you see what I mean) http://bit.ly/de6iSj

21. märz. [tagebuchbloggen, urlaubsedition.] http://ff.im/-hVjnH

Near perfect review of Sugababe's Sweet 7 "The Sugababes are now officially dead." (excellent disclaimer too) : http://bit.ly/clv2ZN

"The award from the trade magazine and body was presented by Smack the Pony star Sally Phillips." http://bit.ly/dyHXbk

Carnival of Monsters, Episode 4 http://ff.im/-hS2vL

Ben Priest http://ff.im/-hRnZ4

Sugababes — a band or a brand? http://ff.im/-hRedN

How Twitter makes us more productive http://ff.im/-hR9OX

Ambisonics and Periphony [part 1] http://ff.im/-hR9vH

Torchwood star Kai inspired by cousin to help sick kids http://ff.im/-hR3Qw 2 days ago

A Hard Day's Night http://ff.im/-hR38W

Adam Curtis presents: The making of a charity record. "Never break the spirit of the foooorest..." I have this single. http://bit.ly/c9TjN6

Adam Curtis presents: Guinea Pig as diagnostic tool (squeek, squeek, squeek) http://bit.ly/c9TjN6

Lewis Carroll's Shifting Reputation http://bit.ly/9fBqoP

On the death of new art, by Wagner: http://bit.ly/cME9Hp

Wahoo! Sophia Myles, Simon Russell Beale, Ian Glenn and Laila Rouass join the cast of Spooks for the ninth season: http://bit.ly/cVT9aK

Kick-Ass needs its own kick-ass music http://ff.im/-hOB77

Compaq 110C-1100 Mini Laptop - £124 @ Asda *Instore Only* http://ff.im/-hOdYd

The Night the IgNobel Awards Came to London http://ff.im/-hNv9z

Plans for Chester Cathedral Quarter to go on public display http://ff.im/-hNv1z

Rant: Is this chopper going to Speke? http://ff.im/-hNOX9

Saboteurs? Us? BBC 6 Music denies hijack claim as Archers take a punk hit http://ff.im/-hMQAy

The Commodore 64 Returns http://ff.im/-hMKgv

Red Button and widescreen http://ff.im/-hMpRi

The End of Attribution? http://ff.im/-hLgtB

Tales of the Unexpected: Complete DVD Collection (Series 1 - 9) - £32.97 delivered @ Amazon for the lot http://ff.im/-hLgtD

Adam Smith Institute's proposals could mean curtains for UK theatre | Lyn Gardner http://ff.im/-hKd4C

CMAP #6: Why did you pick such an awful cover for your new book? http://ff.im/-hK9tI

Bloody Boys, Beauty And The Beat http://ff.im/-hK6nT

Wrongness Czar http://ff.im/-hK6nJ

Revisiting the First Ladies’ Homes http://ff.im/-hK16W

The new rules for reviewing media http://ff.im/-hK16V

#spotify Ellie Goulding's Guns and Horses http://bit.ly/9uUt81 sounds like faster Minnie Driver's Star and Satellites http://bit.ly/bXIrFA

Tom Baker to record for Big Finish? http://ff.im/-hFq1L

Political Nerds Preparing to O.D. on C-Span's Complete 23-Year Archive http://ff.im/-hFl9t

Really Old, Like Moira Stuart http://ff.im/-hFgSE

11% of news on Google is original reporting. Possibly http://ff.im/-hF84Q

heimwärts. http://ff.im/-hF23R

Avatar and Oscar again raise the question: What is cinematography? (Part 2) http://ff.im/-hCkgB

Nixon speaks http://ff.im/-hCfWV

Liverpool International Photography Festival Gets Go Ahead http://ff.im/-hC9Ip

The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy 2 DVD Set £5 @ Amazon & Play http://ff.im/-hC1aa

Anamatronic Werewolf Needed at Forbidden Pictures, London http://ff.im/-hBVWv

Can't we have this film instead please? http://bit.ly/djuTqHhttp://bit.ly/djuTqH (via @RobBuckley )

Juliet and Her Romeo: Star-crossed senior citizens http://ff.im/-hAOZS

The Littlest Hobo comes to dvd http://bit.ly/cnqkgJ ("There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be...")

Blu-Ray Movies Region Coding Database List (the majority of US blu-rays can in fact be played anywhere!) http://bit.ly/aC3Ppe

The Difference Between Firefox, Opera, Explorer & Safari http://ff.im/-huMEo

Karen Gillan: Meet Doctor Who's new assistant http://ff.im/-huHRp

Kicking ass in six frames http://ff.im/-huzeD

Is Paris Hardening My Heart? http://ff.im/-huued

Shakespeare and Company, a creative sanctuary | Stephen Emms http://ff.im/-huu1J

Anyone fancy a cool Ice-T? http://ff.im/-hurjk

Eurovision: Britain turns out to have a cruel sense of humour http://ff.im/-hsTE5

BBC One ageism.

TV You will have seen or heard a story this morning accusing the BBC of ageism yet again, especially on BBC One. The Guardian reports:

"The study, which examined a week's worth of TV output, found that BBC2 had the highest proportion of actors and presenters aged over 50, with 37%, but BBC1 had just 20% of its presenters and cast members aged over 50%, compared with 27% on ITV1. Channel 4 had only 12% of presenters actors aged 50 or over, while Channel Five had none at all.

Overall, the The Older Faces Audit, by market research consultants PCP, found that 22% of presenters and cast members were over 50, compared with 34% of the general population. The study, commissioned by retirement village company Anchor, monitored TV programmes on the five main terrestrial channels from 20 February to 26 February.

Taking into account that no one seems to be taking a metaphoric baseball bat to Channel 4 because it's still considered to be a "youth" service even though it's predominately trying to go toe-to-toe with BBC television much of the time, I haven't really been trained in quantitative research but two elements are likely to skew the results away from favouring BBC One in that week.

From the information available, the survey doesn't include all on-screen contributors from the information provided, just presenters and actors. If you included contributors -- ie, interviewees, guests and contestants on gameshows, the figure would be increased considerably. To just include presenters and actors poorly represents what is being presented on screen. Most of the people being interviewed on Countryfile for example are over fifty but they wouldn't have been added either.

Plus, one week's worth of programmes looks like a very small sample for this kind of survey, since special events can blur the statistics. Looking at the schedule for BBC One that week, In an ordinary week, the usual episodes of Larkrise, Antiques Roadshow, Songs of Praise and New Tricks would have bumped up the numbers, but at the end of February there was also loads of live athletics and the Bafta Awards. How did they deal with that? Did they include all of the people giving and receiving awards because from what I remember it was mostly young people giving older people the "bronze" faces.

But the survey looks spurious anyway because it apparently Five had no presenters or actors on screen for that week, despite the multiple episodes of NCIS with David McCallum who was born in 1933. An import, certainly, but in looking at other reports trying to find a copy of the survey on-line, I've found nothing to say what did or didn't include in that direction. If they did only feature home-grown material then that has to be underlined.

Whilst it's true that older presenters and actors can get a raw deal on television, attempting to prove the point by narrowing the statistics is not the way to go. They can come back to me when they've looked at a few month's worth and a larger sample and properly represent what the viewer is actually seeing on screen.

New nu-Who new USA trailer.

That's more like it. Loads of dialogue, moments of charm ("They're scared of me..."), more a sense of what the performances are going to be like and a confirmation that this is a very different programme from the one which ended on New Year's Day.

New nu-Who new USA trailer.

That's more like it. Loads of dialogue, moments of charm ("They're scared of me..."), more a sense of what the performances are going to be like and a confirmation that this is a very different programme from the one which ended on New Year's Day.

Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: Another Woman (1988)

Then A rare example of a film that I watched during a television broadcast which was on Boxing Day 1994 according to the BFI’s film database. I fell asleep. Which interesting because I fell asleep on this occasion as well. What we have here is Woody Allen film as possible cure for insomnia.

Now One of Woody’s more obvious filmic experiments, in Another Woman he asks whether its possible to have an intellectual as a sympathetic character within a relationship drama. Generally in films, the sympathetic clever people tend to be boffins prophesising then battling against global decimation, detectives or within a story in which their learnin’ is beside the point. In Another Woman, Gina Rowlands’s character is confronted with the truth that her intellect has subsumed her emotional side leading her to distance herself from those who are supposed to closest to her.

Unfortunately, and this demonstrates the failure of the experiment, she also succeeds in distancing the audience from her as well. That’s not technically because of Gina Rowlands’s performance. She’s accomplishing what Woody called upon her to do which is to shut down the more histrionic elements of her work with Cassavettes. It’s simply that as the director suspected because he nearly puts the words in Mia Farrow’s pregnant mother’s mouth, we’re unable to unpick the connection between the characters life and accomplishments and her attitude, understand why someone like that could be so neurotic.

The director originally envisioned the central idea as a comedy. A man moves into an apartment next door to a psychiatrists office and like Rowlands hears the confessions of a young lady which he then uses to help or seduce her. He then switched the idea, in a pre-echo of Melina and Melinda, to see what it would happen if it was a woman and a drama and a Bergmanesque piece at that. Perhaps his mistake was to draw it even further away and make Farrow’s character even less consequential, not have the two real characters meet too far into the picture, preferring instead to shift their connection into dream sequences and the metaphysical.

It seems as though Rowlands’s learning experience could have been in taking this daughter-like figure under her wing helped along by the extra insight provided by her eavesdropping, forever changing her own behaviour to accommodate whatever Mia is thinking of her, more of a two-hander, a rare occasion when Allen’s ability to gathered a wonderful cast works against the product. Not that there isn’t a guilty pleasure in seeing Hackman, Holm, Plimpton and Danner in a Woody Allen film – it’s an example from this period of the director moving away from his typical repertory – except in this case they’re a distraction from the main point.

Here, nevertheless is my favourite scene. "I've never liked you. By the way, can I borrow some money?"

Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: September (1987)

Then As I’m sure has become apparent, in the years before the internet, or at least I had proper access to the internet, finding Woody Allen films in Liverpool, at least the more “obscure” works, was rather like trying to seek out new Beatles recordings in the Soviet Union. The local HMV always had the likes of Manhattan and Annie Hall in the video section, perhaps some of the earlier, funny ones, but not Zelig, unless there were dozens of rabid fans grabbing copies before I got there. But I’d keep checking. Eventually September turned up in the Virgin Megastore and I snapped it up at full price, even though I was unemployed. Excitedly I watched it that afternoon. God, I was bored. I liked the house (apparently modelled on Mia’s own property) but throughout I wondered: “Who are these people? Why do I care about their problems?”

Now, I found it a deeply moving film with intelligently selected music (the Art Tatum is available on Spotify. Granted, it’s essentially a soap opera featuring middle class people and their relationship issues, no more visceral than an average episode of Eastenders (based on the one episode of Eastenders I’ve watched this decade) but there’s something very British about how all of the character’s emotions are pent up and though people say what they’re really feeling, it’s stuttering and piecemeal and always forbidden. I identified somewhat with Mia’s character, not because of her murderous matriarch, but the lack of inertia and the desperate personal disappointment of being profoundly unable to take the next step. Any similarity to Denham Elliot who seems to be on the edge of the drama also turning up at the end of scenes having missed the context and being left with the emotional clear-up is purely coincidental.

Famously, September is the film which Woody preoduced twice, one of the few occasions when a remake has been released without its predecessor seeing the light of day. The original version of September was shot and edited with Christopher Walken then Sam Shepherd as Peter, Maureen O'Sullivan as Diane and Charles Durning as Howard. Woody wasn’t happy with the results, some of the performances and also how he’d paced some of the scenes, so instead of using his four week pick-up period to retool what he already had, he went back in and rewrote and reshot the film all over again with Sam Waterson, Elaine Stritch and Denholm Elliott in the aforementioned roles which must have been a strange process for the remaining cast members, if fairly analogous to a theatre production where actors come and go all of the time. I’ve always wondered how Shephard, O’Sullivan and Durning found out that their collaboration with Woody Allen would never see the light of day …

New nu-Who new trailer.

TV When I was a little boy I dreamt of ... Well, I don't think you want to know what I dreamt of ...



The trailer and clips are coming thick and fast. This offers far more visual information about the new series. As well as a surprise monster return and the tantalising glimpse of the back of someone running towards Stonehenge in a sheepskin coat the general feel is more daylight, less gel lighting, old school look for the Daleks and lots and lots of space.

Incidentally, that little girl from the clip. Having read farther than I should have into this spoilery review from Scott at The Stage blog, I think I've fallen into a very large me shaped trap.

New nu-Who new trailer.

TV When I was a little boy I dreamt of ... Well, I don't think you want to know what I dreamt of ...



The trailer and clips are coming thick and fast. This offers far more visual information about the new series. As well as a surprise monster return and the tantalising glimpse of the back of someone running towards Stonehenge in a sheepskin coat the general feel is more daylight, less gel lighting, old school look for the Daleks and lots and lots of space. Incidentally, that little girl from the clip. Having read farther than I should have into this spoilery review from Scott at The Stage blog, I think I've fallen into a very large me shaped trap.

New nu-Who.

TV There are people in the world now who aren't in the production team who've seen the first episode of the new series of Doctor Who due to the press launch tonight. They're talking about it on twitter or tossing about huge spoilers in reviews. The overall opinion is very positive, generally saying it's different but still brilliant.

I feel much as I did at about this time five years ago, unbelievably excited and desperately nervous at the same time (insert my usual football analogy here). It's a clean slate, albeit with some of the original chalk markings still apparent here and there. Luckily, this time, in interviews, the star isn't curiously talking about his role in the past tense ...



... and look at that a whole few seconds of the new episode. Isn't he great? Abrupt and charming and not talking down to the small girl. Reminds me somewhat of the relationship Eccleston had with the kids in The Empty Child. My guess about who the small child is? That it's Amy and the five minute jump will turn out to be fifteen years like Renette in The Girl In The Fireplace.

For the next ten days those precious few minutes will equal the Zapruder film for being poured over looking for clues ...

New nu-Who.

TV There are people in the world now who aren't in the production team who've seen the first episode of the new series of Doctor Who due to the press launch tonight. They're talking about it on twitter or tossing about huge spoilers in reviews. The overall opinion is very positive, generally saying it's different but still brilliant.

I feel much as I did at about this time five years ago, unbelievably excited and desperately nervous at the same time (insert my usual football analogy here). It's a clean slate, albeit with some of the original chalk markings still apparent here and there. Luckily, this time, in interviews, the star isn't curiously talking about his role in the past tense ...



... and look at that a whole few seconds of the new episode. Isn't he great? Abrupt and charming and not talking down to the small girl. Reminds me somewhat of the relationship Eccleston had with the kids in The Empty Child. My guess about who the small child is? That it's Amy and the five minute jump will turn out to be fifteen years like Renette in The Girl In The Fireplace. For the next ten days those precious few minutes will equal the Zapruder film for being poured over looking for clues ...

Watching (almost) all (as it turns out now) of Woody Allen's films in order: King Lear (1987)

Then Or rather not then. Not now even, not really. Surprisingly for such a renowned director, Jean-Luc Godard’s King Lear is a rarity on home formats. But in attempting to track down a copy I found some sources …

- Amazon.com has ex-rental VHS copies from secondary sellers, the cheapest of which is $87.99 US.
- A company called LearMedia in Canada offers what look like bootlegs of this VHS on sale for $27.99 US.
- The film was released on proper dvd. In Italy. Someone in the US is selling a copy at £23.99 plus postage. Which looked like the most obvious option until I saw …
- A video website called Veoh with a free to watch but poor quality version provided you have their proprietorial video player, then …
- … this BardFilm blogpost which has a clip from the film and Woody’s entire contribution which lasts for about two minutes and …

… decided to watch that instead. Which I did about fifteen minutes ago. But obviously as a Molly Ringwald completest I will have to get around to the whole thing, presumably when I’m watching all of Molly Ringwald’s films in order and when the process is more cost effective. Shot in the same year as Pretty In Pink. Amazing.

Now The main draw of that clip is hearing Woody speaking Shakespeare’s real verse after he mangled it so entertainingly in Sex*. Interesting that in both projects he played the fool. His delivery is quite dry and somewhat like his voiceover for Radio Days. But it is profoundly disappointing after all of these years since first reading about the film at university in the 90s to discover that it is just a cameo and there are no shots of him crouching meaningfully with a Lear figure in the wilderness.

For his part, Woody had this to say to Stig Bjorkman on the experience:

“That was a unique experience, because I love Godard’s work. I never saw that movie. But he asked me, he was here, came into this room and asked me if I would like to be in his King Lear. For him I would have done anything because he’s one of the really great masters. And he said it would only take a few hours in the morning. So I went over to the place where they were filming, and he was in his bathrobe, with his cigar, directing. He had a very small crew, like three people or something. One cameraman, one sound person and somebody else. It couldn’t be more sparse. And I felt while was doing it, this is going to be a very silly movie. A very foolish movie. But I thought, this is for Godard. And I got a chance to meet him. Then I left and I’ve never heard about the movie since. I never saw it.”

Apparently Godard only read the first and last few pages of the play and went from there which rather explains things. Only The Cinema has a longer review.

Emergency: Liverpool Twestival seeks venue

Liverpool Life The Liverpool Twestival is happening next Thursday 25th but as was announced earlier on their twitter feed, the venue (who shall remain nameless) has dropped out.

If you are a venue that has a window next Thursday night and you think you can accommodate about a hundred Tweeters, a band, a raffle and other fun and games, please contact the Twestival organisers via their website.

Or their twitter feed. Or email me feelinglistless@btopenworld.com and I'll pass you on to the organisers. Thanks.

Watching all of Woody Allen's films in order: Interlude.

Now I do hope you're enjoying the latest mini-blogbuster. I appreciate that some of you might not be Woody Allen fans and the kind of not Woody Allen fans who'll remain unconvinced by my meanderings. Now that I've built up some momentum I'll try to offer some variety. But I do tend to write about the kinds of things which are happening to me at a given moment and at the given moment I'm watching Woody Allen films. A lot. Though I don't think I'm going to make my artificial Easter deadline.

For those of you who are trying to follow along, there are a couple of things I wanted to mention which may be getting away from me but wouldn't fit into one of the review posts.

(1) These aren't reviews in the traditional sense. They're reactions, the first thing which comes into my head moments after I finish watching one of the films and sit at the keyboard. I'm never entirely happy with what I've written, but I'm slowly coming to realise that like the Hitchcock posts there seems little point in simply replicating the volumes of material and excellent reviews already online. If you want something more coherent, can I recommend Roger Ebert? Try search under in the advanced options.

(2) Somehow they always seem to average at about seven hundred and fifty words. I have no idea why. And like a Woody Allen film that goes over ninety minutes, anything longer always feels slightly ponderous.

(3) I was inspired by this article from Joe Queenan about watching everything Ingmar Bergman directed. The original plan was to watch everything then write a parody of Queenan's article, the joke being that I'd been inspired by someone watching Bergman's films to watch Allen's films just as Woody was inspired by watching Ingmar's films to make his films more like Ingmar's. But then I thought, why write one blog post when I can write sixty?

(4) For those of you reading through RSS: I've updated the title bar on the blog for the first time in half a decade. See if you can guess who it is.

(5) I mentioned them in the Stardust Memories post, but my main guides on this j-word are:

Woody Allen on Woody Allen: In conversation with Stig Bjorkman

and

The Woody Allen Companion by Stephen Spignesi

Both are early nineties editions, horrendously out of date, but often very insightful which is why they're forever cropping up in this text. I am looking at Conversations with Woody Allen: His Films, the Movies, and Moviemaking by Eric Lax to help cover the nineties and noughties.

I'll certainly need the moral support.