Crimes and Misdemeanors
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.78 You Save: $8.20 (55%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $5.34 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Canada
Movie Reviews of Crimes and Misdemeanors
Movie Review: Walking the line between comedy & tragedy
Summary: 4 Stars
I love some of Allen's films and hate some. He did really wacky comedy in his early films, which I never liked and then broke through to a more realistic, romantic and equally funny style in the wonderful Annie Hall. His reverence for the ultra somber and serious work of Bergman spawned some of his more dreary attempts; he didn't do "serious" very well but I give him credit for trying.
Here I am amazed at how successful he is at combining his comic view with his very serious themes. He certainly has a handle on a segment of the population that bears charicature. His bombastic, egotistical producer (Alan Alda) is wonderful and I loved the twist at the end when this guy gets the girl. The successful ophtamalogist, very well played by Martin Landau, could be a source of comic contempt and he does come off that way, but still he seems human and not without his redeeming values. His hood brother, Jack, also very well played by Jerry Orbach, gives another slice of the problem of morality. Funniest, to me, was the picture of the elderly philosopher whom the Allan character idolizes. Allen, the film maker, isn't afraid to demythologize this type, either.
The rabbi who goes blind (Sam Waterston) seems to be the one character for whom Allen has genuine respect and he closes the film on a serious note by showing the rabbi haltingly dancing with his daughter at her wedding. I could argue that Allen copped out at the end by tacking a serious ending on what was, up till then, a very comic film. But I think he really did achieve something quite remarkable in this movie and I recommend it.
The whole cast shines, including Mia Farrow, who looks radiant here and Angelica Huston and Claire Bloom.
Movie Review: Now I understand why everybody is so crazy about Woody Allen
Summary: 4 Stars
After watching Woody Allen's two recent movies - "Vicky Christina Barcelona" and "Cassandra's Dream" - and being a little disappointed, I was unsure why Allen was regarded as a great writer and director. Now I know why. "Crimes and Misdemeanors" is a complex story, funny and tragic at the same time, and certainly never dull. My only complaint is that the movie has two separate story lines that I kept waiting to come together and intertwine in some amazing way, but they barely did. I also see why people think Woody plagiarized himself in "Cassandra's Dream." "Brothers-in-crime" story lines in these two movies are very similar.Movie Review: the power of transgression
Summary: 4 Stars
Judah Rosenthal boasts all the accomplishments of a successful ophthalmologist, but is wracked by the guilt and angst of having entangled himself in adultery, lies and murder. He realizes, as the film says toward the very end, that we "define ourselves by our moral choices." Meanwhile, Cliff Stern (Woody Allen) loses the love of his life, Halley (Mia Farrow), who falls for his wife's boorish brother, Lester (Alan Alda). Along the way, Allen's characters discourse on nearly all the important themes of life--love and sex, God and religion, marriage and family, work and calling. Some have hailed this as Woody Allen's best film.Movie Review: a long long time ago, woody allen made good movies
Summary: 4 Stars
woody allens best film since the 70s (and hey this one was 18 years ago!) features great acting turns by martin landau, sam waterston, alan alda, angelica huston, jerry orbach, joanna gleason, claire bloom, and even the usually awful mia farrow (who it might be noted hasnt been cast by a real director she want sleepoing with in 30+ years). his nod to dostoevski (however you want to spell that guys name) is clear in both the title and theme, and for once (maybe its because he only plays a minor role) one of his his post-"manhattan" manhattan movies comes off as real instead of stilted.
Movie Review: God Is Not An Idiot
Summary: 3 Stars
Examining theodicy, the enigma of reconciling a benevolent God with capricious fate and suffering, Woody Allen fails to get much beyond a dark comic-dramatization of a freshman philosophy bull session, attempting to prove heroic enlightenment by forming agnostic conclusions.Martin Landau plays an ophthalmologist having an affair with a frantic, aging stewardess threatening to disrupt his affluent contentment by confronting his wife. Not deriving solace from a kindly Rabbi patient and friend who is facing blindness and recommends honesty, Landau solicits help from his criminal brother to solve the problem with a hired killer. His bouts of conscience include reminiscing moral debates at a family Seder during his adolescence. His father, favoring a morally sensible existence, argues with a nihilistic aunt who trivializes the bible, believes God's non-existence is proven by The Holocaust, and views morality as a social contrivance.
Allen plays an uncompromising documentarian falling in love with an assistant (Farrow), also pursued by his boorish brother-in-law (Alda) who produces sitcoms and relishes being perceived as a creative genius. Alda's deep thoughts include the idea that with enough passage of time, tragedy becomes laughable, believing the Lincoln assassination to be an example. Alda throws his in-law a bone by allowing him to film him at work when Allen would rather work on a portrayal of a humanistic philosopher pondering serious questions. Unlike Landau's cynical aunt, the philosopher believes an empty universe is given meaning when human beings define values for themselves.
Allen's likable character turns the documentary of Alda into a satire of the man's vanity, and we gain sympathy for his protectiveness towards a favorite niece. Shielding her proves futile as Allen learns of the philosopher's suicide while on an outing with her. At a wedding reception, Allen discovers he has lost his battle for Farrow's affections to the egotist and then engages in a chance colloquy with Landau, wistful over the fading of his conscience. Allen's sadness invites us to share a resignation over the capriciousness of fate, the success of obnoxious people, the joyless end of an unmourned mistress, the unrequited love of a sensitive man, a sweet woman taken in by a cad, the blindness of a benevolent Rabbi, the despair of a man of apparent wisdom, and the return to comfort by a philanderer and murderer all serving to portray God as incompetent because life is unpredictable and joy and suffering are not proportionate to decency or malice. The answers of religion must be contrivances.
However, it requires contrivances to view God as a fool. Extreme skepticism often ignores contrary evidence to its cosmic-accident interpretation of existence. If we are just "a pack of neurons" and our mental life nothing but electrical impulses, then we cannot explain the realm of abstract concepts, including those of science. Nor can we explain the human mind's openness to truth, the foundation of all thought. Atheists cannot explain why anything should go right, even observation and deduction, why good logic should not be as misleading as bad logic, if they are both chance movements in the brain of a bewildered ape. Atheists exalt reason, but they cannot account for reason. Neither can materialism account for consciousness, free will, value judgments, and the existence of a unitary self. In a material world such things cannot exist. Matter cannot be free or have a self. Neither could free will exist if joy and suffering existed in perfect proportion with virtue and malice reducing our functionality to stimulus-response reward-punishment contingencies like that of lab rats pursuing a piece of cheese. Love and courage could not exist.
Similarly, no matter how we claim to be nonjudgmental and deny innate moral truth, we can not ignore the countering evidence of our own anger, which reminds us that there are natural expectations we have, should have, and can not avoid having of each other. Anger is the existential expression of moral outrage even when we exercise moral outrage at the very concept of moral outrage, reflexively calling anyone presenting a moral vision a hypocrite. In our sober moments, we know the life of the desperate woman is as sacred as the successful doctor. Nonetheless, we often live with the temptation to defer to "important people," hoping the identification of an imaginary human genius will confer a sense of superiority on ourselves by our presumed courage in recognizing theirs. We are quick to excuse the transgressions of genius. Morality can not be enough for great minds if they represent insights that anyone can have. Allen is a brilliant satirist of human pretense, often portraying trendy sophisticates as fools, but just as often sides with their elitist conventions that view metaphysical and moral questions as hopelessly complex needing great minds to sort it out for the rest of us. The last advice from Allen's philosopher is to hope for some genius of the future to give us life's meaning, although in the interim loving our families provides meaningful hope.
But since a benevolent creator implies the universal nature of important truth, the fading of conscience does not really occur so easily, and an ethical sense is innate to human decency. The killing of a man of noble purpose is still a tragedy 140 years later. So is the killing of a lonely mistress. A God with the wisdom to be subtle also invites us to find meaning in loving our families, which is precisely what we don't do when we exercise a blind faith in our self-definition. Self-worship is closer to the definition of evil. It may be that we prefer to ignore evidence that God is not idiotic because it helps us to avoid realizing that we often are. Why impeach our failures of decency if God is in no position to judge us negatively if we don't? Fortunately, as our better, God is merciful in judging our mendacity, our failures, and our acts of desperation. There is a vast body of literature examining theodicy, unfortunately most written by humble people whom intellectuals never notice.