Greatest Directors: Woody Allen; Part 6, Interiors (1978)

Interiors (1978) is an American drama film, directed by Woody Allen. The sixth film of his I’ve covered in this series. From immediate impressions, it’s a huge departure from anything we’ve seen before. You could say Annie Hall, and his boycott of the Oscars that year showed he was moving towards a much more serious direction, instead of the satire, the slapstick. The humor is surprisingly nowhere to be found in Interiors, and more surprisingly, Woody Allen isn’t in this one. My initial first look at Interiors before I sat down and watched it weeks later, was that it was somewhat of a domestic drama, headed in a much more artistic direction than Bananas (1971) and the like, however, as deep and poetic as Interiors maybe, I felt it had something missing. 

Often stressed, and successful Writer Renata (Diane Keaton)

Interiors is about a family as two parents go through a trial separation  until finally the husband demands a full divorce and introduces his new wife to his three daughters, the narrative focuses highly on the three daughters and their reaction to this, and how they cope. The mother (Geraldine Page) is incredibly overbearing, and tries to force her ways on her husband and her children, as we discover she’s fairly neurotic through the course of the story, and is ultimately unable to live without her husband (E.G Marshall). Renata (Diane Keaton) is the oldest of the three sisters, and harbors some responsibility, a lot of the tension from the film comes between her, and her husband Frederick (Richard Jordan). Renata is a successful writer, but Frederick feels he is unable to live up to her standards and grows to resent her. Meanwhile Joey (Mary Beth Hurt) is floundering in life, and is unable to find her purpose, or a job that suits her, she is strongly attached to her mother even though ultimately her mother rejects her, and prefers Renata for her artistic merits. Third sister Flyn (Kristin Griffith) is a relatively successful actor and model, yet relatively dim as is the subject of jealousy from Renata and Joey as she flutters and blushes for their spouses amusement. 

Interiors is definitely an expressionist film, highly focused around families, dynamics, and how we interact with one another. Woody Allen identifies the film himself as an homage to Ingmar Bergman, and it shows. The film it’s self has many elements of realism, and naturalism, with virtually no score throughout the film, which preserves emotion and makes you focus on performance. Akin to Annie Hall (1977) Allen uses cuts to juxtapose scenes of varying emotions showing characters in their varying moods which makes them feel remarkably human, seeing Renata and and Frederick perfectly happy in one scene for example, and soon a cut shows them arguing and very malcontent. The film is very dark, I assume not much lighting has been used as to try and capture that kind of danish naturalism Allens paying homage to in this film. I’d be lying if I said a lot of the film wasn’t very samey, and we basically live out the same arguments with several different characters, but there are some very potent scenes. One of which occurs at the end, in which eve the neurotic mother decides she finally can’t cope being alone, as she walks into the sea. Her daughter Joey attempts to save her, only to be dragged back by her husband to stop her from drowning, during this we see intercut shots of the other daughters and the ex-husband sleeping. Quite a potent metaphor showing they’re done caring for her, and they’ve basically accepted this, signified by their passive sleeping. 

The floundering and purposeless, Joey.

The performances are pretty potent, however no one’s really given a great chance to shine given that the naturalistic style doesn’t bode well for high drama, as it tries to preserve human emotion, as opposed to theatrical emotion. Overall, there are elements of Allen’s style still evident here, in particular it definitely shows his understanding of the cinematic elements more than his other films. Interiors definitely isn’t as interesting, witty, or satirical it does show directorial talent. For those interested in personal human drama, it’s worth a watch, if not it’s probably a bit bland, and leaves a bitter taste on the tongue.

A death in the family.

Summary: Interesting, but not entertaining. Woody Allen’s 6th film, Interiors is based on family dynamics, and human interaction. Particularly those who are artistically inclined, however while it does show directorial talent and performance, the film is very naturalistic which at times can be quite dull or otherwise quite uncharacteristic, especially for an aesthetic film lover like myself. Regardless, Interiors is at least interesting if nothing else, and I’ll continue with Stardust Memories, next time, on Greatest Directors. Follow me on Twittor @Sams_Reel_Views. 

Greatest Directors: Woody Allen, Part 5: Annie Hall (1977)

Hello people, this is Part 5 of my Greatest Directors series, in particular focusing on incredibly seminal satirical comedy auteur Woody Allen. After trawling through some of the film’s that started Woody Allen’s career, finally we reach a real turning point in his career, 6 years down from his first solo Directing debut Bananas (1971) we take a look at the film that got critical acclaim for Allen, the one that put him on the map so to speak. At least for a little while, I can’t really judge this is all written as I discover it. So, Annie Hall (1977) is a satirical comedy, starring Woody Allen himself in the title role, along side Diane Keaton. This is an important thing to mention, as together they star in this, and Woody’s preceding 2 films, and Play it Again, Sam (1972), as a result by the time Annie Hall’s released quite a serious romantic drama, the chemistry is really solidified, it feels as if they’re reading off the script a lot of time, and Diane Keaton and Woody Allen are only good actors, not fantastic so the real chemistry between the two characters in Annie Hall is nice to see.

Alvy Singer reliving his childhood days.

The narrative follows Alvy Singer (Woody Allen) as he recounts his romance and time spent with Photographer and singer Annie Hall (Diane Keaton). It’s sort of a recount, as the first shot we get is Alvy addressing the audience in close-up, talking about how he’s had many marriages but his romance with Annie Hall reigns above the others, and how he can’t stop thinking about it as he recounts the story. The story’s told in vague chronological order, but has flashbacks to kind of flesh-out the characters showing numerous stages in their relationship. Showing as their an established couple with problems first, flashing back to how they first met, and how they grew from then on, inevitably building until they part ways, and remain friends. The use of shifting the chronology, but using it logically to really contrast different points in the relationship, like the early loving stage, the routine, the break-up is really effective, and relate-able to the relationships we’ve all been in. At points it also has split-shots for example contrasting Alvy and Annie’s families, or contrasting how Alvy once believed school was important, and then denouncing it as a joke, the ultimate statement that people change constantly. The real effectiveness comes at the end of the story, when the storytelling makes you realize that the two characters we once knew are now completely contrasting people.

Use of the split juxtaposition shot I mention.

The humor in Annie Hall is slightly different from the medium he’s established in the 4 films I’ve watched prior to this of his, and at the point I last reviewed Love and Death I thought of it as incredibly formulaic.  There isn’t as much stupid slapstick, him being strangled by a hose, his weapons disassembling in his hands, slip-slapping around being all funny-like, it’s very much a serious tone, for a movie that has serious moments mixed with some really smart, high-brow literary gags as opposed to the latter audiences were probably used to. In addition there’s a lot of moments where he just takes the audience to the side, and talks to them, adding to what’s happening in the scene which really adds a characteristic to the narrator of the story, makes it feel unique and personal which is odd really. It feels personal even though he’s addressing the audience which usually breaks any idea of theatrical elements, however Woody Allen on screen is always a likable character and it’s hard to not think of him as a friend when he addresses you in such in a jovial fashion.

Alvy and Diane ‘Wicked witch of the west’ Keaton.

Annie Hall was certainly praised at that year’s oscars gaining 4 awards in total, Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, and of course Best Actress for miss Diane Keaton. Thing is, Annie Hall certainly doesn’t feel like a best picture film, if anyone understands what I mean by this. I think it’s because it took a very dull genre that hadn’t been explored incredibly well by that point in time (Romantic Comedy) and gave it depth, gave it cinematic insight on many levels with two characters that felt unmistakably human.  That’s really a hard sell in the genre, giving you a man and a woman, a romance that’s believable, and ultimately flawed because that’s what hooks audiences in, I mean sure some people do just want the happy ending ala Tim Robbins in The Player (1992), but every stage felt incredibly real, and the dialogue was at a level of Allen’s humor where it was still witty, satirical, and pulled off 3rd wall gags, but it still maintained the overall pace and composure of the film. Compared to Sleeper, or Love and Death where it just got awfully tedious towards the end, and kind of forgot themselves as films.

OH MY GOD IT’S JEFF GOLDBLUM.

As for Allen, seeing Bananas, Love and Death, the absurdly long one about sex, and Sleeper, I’m not entirely surprised to see a really well-written, well thought out film like Annie Hall in his filmography. He certainly had the potential, and the knowledge of the cinematic elements given his heavy use of homage and reference. However, it makes me incredibly curious to see what happens next with Interiors (1978) given a lot of things I’ve read about it bill it as ‘Ill received’, or ‘imperfect’ and some jargon about it being rushed, and incredibly confused. A lot of people regard Annie Hall as the peak of Allan’s career, some judge it as a turning point. Needless, I look forward as always as I leave you now with often praised scene with an odd cameo from Film and Communications critic Marshall McLuhan. Until next time, you can follow me on Twittor @Sams_Reel_Views  and I would appreciate it if you like/follow/comment if you like what you saw. Adios!

Imdb Addendum:

Annie Hall (1977) is a satirical romantic comedy from witty auteur Woody Allen. The film feels like a last hurrah in some ways, given his filmography and the very artistic direction he took following the success of Annie Hall. The film follows a comedian who recalls one of the greatest loves of his life, and how he fears he may never be able to forget her. Woody Allen stars as his comedic persona once again, alongside long time collaborator Diane Keaton. The story is told in a very vivid, and complex way as to make it feel a lot more fluid and snappy as opposed to melodramatic. I’m not so certain about Annie Hall’s conclusion in the Top 250. I can see it’s appeal, and how it it’s kind of the pinnacle of the rom-com.  However I feel mostly opposed to it, just because some of Allen’s other work has so much more soul. I suppose that’s just personal bias.

Judgment – Debatable

Greatest Directors: Woody Allen, Part 4; Love and Death (1975)

Back again, with part 4 of greatest directors, as we delve another notch deeper into Woody Allen’s directing career, as we look at satirical period drama spoof Love and Death (1975). I did no background reading, or had no prior knowledge on this one at all, and was quite surprised when it turned out to be a period drama. I was optimistic at first, but Love and Death didn’t really deliver for me, in any of it’s basic functions.

The old bent sword gag, might have been funny if I hadn’t also seen it in Bananas.

In brief summary, Allen plays Russian oaf Boris, who harbors feelings for his cousin Sonja (Diane Keaton). Boris then is sent to war, reluctantly, but somehow survives and is heralded as a war hero. Meanwhile it shows a basic subplot of Sonja married to a herring-monger. Afterwards Boris is challenged to a duel, as he sleeps with a stern, noble gun-fighters wife. He shows him pacifism, and basically succeeds and as a result Sonja agrees to marry him, believing he’d be shot dead by the duel. Then Napoleon threatens to invade Russia, as Boris and Sonja formulate a plot to assassinate him.

Only a brief synopsis, but fairly suiting for a film that doesn’t really have a narrative. Love and Death feels absurdly generic, it doesn’t feel as textured and satirical as Bananas, as wacky or absurdist like Everything You’ve Ever Wanted to Know About Sex, or as genuinely interesting as Sleeper and it’s set pieces. The film follows a very bland parody structure taking the setting and topic matter of the Period Drama, and just using it as a vehicle for relatively bland jokes and an absurd amount of screen-time for Allen. It might have also been the fact that Period Drama doesn’t exactly mix well with comedy, the humor often comes out more surreal than anything else because the context is kind of malleable. The wit isn’t as evident here, as he very much relies on slapstick, and crude humor involving the kinder sex. It just doesn’t have that blend of narrative cohesion, witty quips, slapstick, and amusing presence his earlier films had. However, in Diane Keaton’s second appearance in one of Allen’s films she does bring a relative amount of humor to it, and is a good compliment to Allen.

There’s not really an entirely big amount to say about Love and Death other than that. Also on that note, the social commentary is not evident at all here, the sly tongue in cheek, left-wing shenanigans are nowhere to be seen. Love and Death wasn’t a ‘bad’ film, just incredibly dull. It’s very shallow,  it feels like it’s been written for the sake of making a film, in terms of generic mainstream production. That’s it for today I suppose, can’t always have a lot to say. Hopefully I’ll be able to amuse you all a bit more with Part 5 as we take a look at Annie Hall (1977), a big Oscar-winner and supposed turning point in the career of Mr.Allen. Tomorrow’ll be an Actor Study piece, as I start a new series detailing an actor’s career and performances, focusing heavily on characterisation, but also being a review in it’s self. So thanks for reading, please Like/Comment/Follow if you feel inclined, and until next time. Cheers!

– Sam. 

Greatest Directors: Woody Allen: Part 3 ‘Sleeper (1973)

Look like it’s a double wahaaammy today people, as I continue my director series, as I delve deeper into the satirical works of Auteur Mr.Woody Allen as I take a gander at often forgotten Science-Fiction spoof Sleeper (1937). I wasn’t sure what to expect when I first read about Sleeper, before sitting down to watch it, but at a moderate guess at what he’s known for, and the two films so far, I generally guessed that it’d be a satirical comedy, with hints of romance, masquerading in a science-fiction shell while it plays lightly on inter-textuality and the conventions and tropes of the sci-fi Genre. It turns out that’s pretty much what Sleeper is, a fairly cliche’ but interesting sci-fi context that’s essentially a contemporary rom-com at it’s core.

He’s a robot now. How kooky.

Miles Monroe (Woody Allen) is a health-food store owner, and a musician who is involuntarily frozen using cryogenic technology for 200 years. Scientists illegally unfreeze him, in order to use him as a tool to rebel against the corrupt government and it’s leader, as everyone is scanned and identified on a database, but Miles will have none due to his non-existence in that time period. The scientists who unfroze him are taken away, before telling him he must stop the ‘aries’ project. He meets Luna Schlosser (Diane Keaton), A poet who is at first deeply scared of the ‘alien’ as she claims, however in fairly stereotypical fashion they begin to get along, as Diane shows affection for Miles, and Miles the same. Miles then gets taken as police officers surround the house, as they assimilate his brain, and replace his personality with a new one. Luna thrives in the wild, and joins the resistance who eventually save Milo, as they formulate a plan and conveniently restore his brain. They sneak into an important government building, pretend to be scientists and steal a nose that’s intended to clone the now dead leader of the oppressive state, as they escape in comic fashion and kiss, as the narrative climaxes relatively abruptly?

The elements of Science-Fiction are handled relatively well in terms of scenery and setting.

The sleeper is interesting at first, with it’s unusual hybrid genres of Comedy and Science-Fiction. While the script is interesting, the story often drops flat, and is terribly conceited as opposed to Bananas, which was just clever in it’s narrative progressive. Allen’s and Keaton’s chemistry is interesting, and certainly humorous yet while Allen’s witty quips and dialogue never cease to entertain, the over reliance on slapstick border-lining on the absurd and ridiculous in Benny Hill-esque fashion is a bit much, and really starts to dilute the overall tone in Sleeper. It has some reasonable special effects, make-up, yet fairly dull clinical interiors going for the whole dystopian bland aesthetics. There’s a lot of intertextuality in Sleeper, and various homages to fairly notable science fiction literature, and overall the sci-fi does it’s job of livening up an otherwise generic film. Beyond the sci-fi, the film is essentially just a romantic comedy, in a science-fiction shell, following the formula of a male and a female who don’t get along at first, and then they do, but something complicates why they can’t be together as the relationship expands to a love triangle via the introduction of the rebel leader who Luna is quite taken with. I understand the film is a comedy, but any semblance of real storytelling is discarded during the last half an hour of screen or so, with no real ending? they simply run away with the nose, then embrace? I’m not entirely sure why this is a climax in any way? Sure, many romantic comedies have the typical oh they’re together audience assumes happy ever after ending, but I just expected more from what was apparently a science-fiction tale, and I definitely expected more from Woody Allen who’s shown a real affinity for unusual storytelling and intrigue so far, but I was honestly quite disappointed by the climax of Sleeper. 

Yum, instant pudding.

As for symbolism or social commentary, Sleeper didn’t have a whole lot considering it’s an Allen film. At most you could claim the sheer malleable nature of the characters, that Luna becomes so inverted from her ritualistic, technologically dependent life and at one point seems incredibly stubborn before making a completely unprovoked change of heart. There’s an interesting contrast as Allen becomes the one integrated in society when he is brainwashed, and Luna is the rebel like Allen at the beginning of the film. As I continue to watch Allen films I’m finding really badly written female characters. They’re always love interests, and usually the butt of many jokes, and not much else. I guess you could imply it’s a product of it’s time in some ways, but it’s often grating, although it could be said in Bananas and Sleeper there’s not really any vaguely important characters other than Allen and his prospective mate. As for consistency and the overall style  i’m starting to find the storytelling of Allen’s films merely as homage and decoration for his humor, merely a casing for his quips. He certainly has directing talent, but hope to see more of a narrative based approach with perhaps less self-indulgence.

I do appreciate a good HAL reference.

I didn’t dislike Sleeper, but I didn’t actively like it either. I found Bananas actively funny, and Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About sex mildly humorous, but with Sleeper i smirked a few times at the quips at beast, as I found the slapstick mostly poor in taste. However, I still look forward to the next installment, however i’ll be taking a break with some other film I’ve been meaning to watch for a while. So until next time film fans! Cheers!, and please Like/Follow/Comment if you so choose.

– Sam.