Schatten und Nebel

I just saw `Shadows and Fog' for the first time this weekend, and while I can't say that it immediately became my favorite Woody Allen film, I did find it a very thoughtful and interesting film (not really a comedy), and an exceptionally beautiful film to look at.

I know this is frowned upon at the IMDb, but a lengthy and very negative review on this page of `Shadows and Fog,' along with a critique of Woody Allen in general, has gotten my dander up, and I felt like putting in my two cents. Why on earth should I, or any film lover, care about how successful a film is financially? Why should I care if a majority of movie patrons like a director's films or not? From my perspective, some of the stupidest trash makes the most money and sells the most tickets. Sure, I liked Jurassic Park -- saw it several times at the cinema, bought the video -- but not because of how much money it made, or how many other people were going to see it. It was because it was fun, and I liked it. Does that mean I should damn more esoteric directors (like Woody Allen) to oblivion? There are directors whose work I don't always understand, but God bless them, if they have the opportunity and the drive to get their cinematic vision realized, more power to them. I don't necessarily have to like their work, or go to see it. But on the whole, I'd rather be talked-up-to then talked-down-to, and being a little confused by a film has never permanently damaged anyone, so far as I know.

So calm down out there, you art-house-haters! It's just entertainment. Read your 20th century history. Limiting entertainment to its lowest common denominator has been tried and tried. No good has ever come of it, to my knowledge.

And incidentally, if you have a predilection for Woody Allen films, and like the look of old black and white expressionist cinema, give `Shadows and Fog' a look. It would maybe kill you?

Another mid-career Allen film unfairly dismissed both by critics and (I must admit) myself at the time of it's release. Sometimes with great filmmakers, we get spoiled and anything flawed or less than pure genius gets maligned for being weaker than that filmmaker's very best work instead of being appreciated for being miles ahead of most of the films that get made.

I was shocked at how much better I liked this on a recent re-viewing almost 20 years after seeing it in the theater. Yes, the super-star cameos still seem a bit distracting and self-serving, but nowhere near as much as in 1992. Yes, some plot elements work better than others, the ending is kind of clunky, etc. But this is still a great-looking, visually dense film, that manages to tread (most of the time) a very difficult tightrope of being funny and playful, while still exploring disturbing themes of paranoia, guilt, crowd mentality, religion, etc. Certainly not a great film, but a brave one more worthy of being enjoyed for it's strengths than attacked for its admitted shortcomings.

On first viewing I wasn't crazy about Shadows and Fog, while the film looked fantastic and was well-directed the characters left me cold, the film didn't seem to know what tone it wanted and the story seemed meandering and dull. On re-watch however Shadows and Fog fared much better(as was with almost all the Allen films that didn't impress at first apart from Anything Else), it is nowhere near among Woody Allen's best and is around the lower middle of his filmography but I found it a good film and not among Allen's worst that it's often said to be. Visually, Shadows and Fog looks fantastic with brilliant black and white cinematography and Expressionistic images that are as striking as they are haunting. Allen's films are always well-made, but Shadows and Fog visually like Zelig is quite unique from a visual standpoint. The music is very eerie and fits the atmosphere perfectly, in fact if anything it adds to it. While it was confusing of what tone the film was trying to go with on first viewing, on re-watch it was much clearer and that criticism seems unfair now. The dialogue is both subtle and hilarious(love the brothel scenes) with sharp homages and insight in characteristic Woody Allen vein, but even more impressive was the murder-mystery element while a really chilling atmosphere is created, helped by the visuals and music. Allen's directing is as always adept and his performance, the most memorable, is a lot of fun. John Cusack does nervous and angsty very nicely and Jodie Foster and Kathy Bates are remarkably good in against-type roles. Shadows and Fog has imperfections, Mia Farrow for me overdoes it and comes across as shrill, John Malkovich deserved much more to do and is a little wasted and Madonna is rather out of place. The story does have its drawn out and aimless patches with an ending that felt convoluted and hurried, and the characters are not very interesting, a lot of them barely in the film. To conclude however, a good film but considering how well the best assets come off it could have been more than good. 7/10 Bethany Cox

"Shadows and Fog" is Woody Allen's tribute to German Expressionism, and it's very interesting, often funny, and at times downright strange. He gives no indication of the setting or time, and as is often true with Allen, there's a serious undertone. His nebishy character, Kleinman, is woken up in the middle of the night in his home for reasons having to do with a serial killer at large. Poor Kleinman doesn't know exactly what he has to do with anything, but as he puts it, everything seems to know what he's supposed to be doing but him. Across town, Mia Farrow is the circus performer Irmy, who finds out her boyfriend (John Malkovich) is cheating on her, so she leaves him. She winds up in a brothel with some real characters played by Lily Tomlin, Kathy Bates, and Jodie Foster. A client (John Cusack) declares himself in love with Mia and offers her money to sleep with him. When it gets up to $700, she accepts. Later she meets Kleinman and sends him to the church to donate all but $50. The priest is impressed, and the police cross Kleinman's name off the list of suspects. Then they meet a beggar, and she sends Kleinman back for half the money. Kleinman's name goes back on the list of suspects.

Yes, it's an odd but fascinating film. The atmosphere is bizarre, very German - dark, bleak, and foggy, with a scary serial killer out of "M." Big stars float in and out of the film, like Madonna, some with tiny roles. The funniest scene is when Kleinman tries to hide out at his ex-girlfriend's (Julie Kavner) who calls him every name in the book and then tries to turn him in.

Kleinman is an innocent man caught in confusing circumstances and times, not sure which side he should be on - there are two factions trying to catch this killer, and both attempt to recruit him - and all the poor guy wants is a promotion at his job. Though his reactions are often amusing, imagine being awoken by the police in the middle of the night and having no idea what it's about. It's happened, though, as it happens in the film. As Kleinman wanders the streets, unsure of where he's going, we can relate.

After completing Shadows and Fog, I found myself once again dismayed by the common claim that Woody Allen makes the same type of film over and over again. In reality, Woody has always been open to trying new and untested things both with his narrative structure and his filmmaking style. Shadows and Fog is another perfect example of Woody's penchant for diverse filmmaking. The 1991 film was Woody Allen's gentle homage to German Expressionism. Shadows and Fog pairs Woody Allen and Mia Farrow in a shadowy town that hides from a strangler that is on the loose. As is the usual Woody Allen film, Shadows and Fog is as wonderfully comedic as it is a thoughtful exercise in grappling with life's deepest questions.

Kleinman (Woody Allen) is a nebbish, nervous bookkeeper who has been pulled into a plot by a group of vigilantes to hunt for a strangler that has been terrorizing their area. A perpetually nervous individual, Kleinman wants nothing to do with a group of lawless men seeking out a murderer. Kleinman would rather stay locked in his apartment safely away from the murderer roaming the streets. To make matters worse, despite the fact that Kleinman has been roped into a group of vigilantes, information about his role in the group is being withheld from him. Sheepishly attempting to find his role within the vigilante group, all the while desperately trying to avoid putting himself in real danger, Kleinman encounters a woman in a traveling circus, Irmy (Mia Farrow) who is also attempting to find her way through life in a much more metaphorical sense. Kindred spirits, Kleinman and Irmy attempt to find a purpose for their lives, all the while trying to save them.

Shadows and Fog works perfectly as a nod to German Expressionism, with gorgeous imagery reminiscent of the greats of the genre such as Robert Wiene and Fritz Lang. Woody Allen's frequent use of black and white photography well into the 90's is a fearless maneuver that deserves uproarious applause. Woody is a filmmaker that uses a variety of film technique achieving artistic significance yet is hardly acknowledged for that. Certain aspects Woody is commonly acknowledged for are present in Shadows and Fog, for instance, it is exquisitely written and has a brilliant sound design. Shadows and Fog is another worthy mention in my crusade to prove that Woody Allen is not a filmmaker that has a clear section of "lower-tier" work, as he is often accused.