Crímenes y pecados

I am beginning a review of Allen's films and decided to start with this one, as it is considered his most intelligent. Certainly, the focus of the film is at the end where the primary character proposes making this film to Woody, who has played a filmmaker. This directly self-referential device is bold, and could have been part of a fine web, as several other filmmakers have created.

But the problem is that we're given pretty thin broth up until that point. Woody tries to be as honestly raw as Chekhov and as deeply symbolic as Kafka. Instead we get a sophomoric effort.

God's eyes are mentioned a dozen times. And the protagonist is an eye doctor who is treating a rabbi who goes blind. `Get it?' Woody shouts. To set up the self-referential last scene, we are treated to Woody playing an unappreciated filmmaker making a film inspired by a Jewish philosopher who seems happy but is not. `Get it?' Woody nudge nudges. To underscore that in the theater, we are the eyes of God, Woody bluntly demonstrates by inserting his own viewing of films and philosophizing about film.

This is not intelligent filmmaking, my friends. It is the clumsiness of someone smart enough to see what art is, but not clever enough to create it. Maybe he thinks 90% of creating art is showing up.

Along the way, we get an interesting performance from Alda. But it is all too obvious that every character's dialog is Woody's and they are acting just as Woody has demonstrated to them. Check out their mannerisms. Maybe his comedies will be better. His books are excellent.

Writer-director Woody Allen smoothly examines the parallels between a nervous documentary filmmaker in love with an indifferent female producer and a celebrated family man contemplating having his frustrated, frustrating mistress bumped off. A serious-comedy, saddled with a bit of pretentious banter as well as a draggy sub-plot with Sam Waterston as a rabbi losing his sight. Still, the incredibly rich performances from a well-chosen group of actors strengthen the film, including Woody as the filmmaker, Alan Alda as his egomaniacal film subject and brother-in-law, Mia Farrow, Martin Landau (in the film's best turn), Anjelica Huston, Caroline Aaron and Jerry Orbach. One of Allen's finest endeavors, cleverly-maneuvered and sly; it is by turns witty, beguiling, funny and ironic. ***1/2 from ****

Martin Landau, a successful doctor, contemplates murdering a former mistress who threatens his easy life while Woody Allen, an unsuccessful filmmaker, contemplates having an extramarital affair. This film, alongside "Annie Hall," will one day be rated as one of Woody Allen's greatest achievements. It is an important, intelligent work that explores the implications of whether or not this is indeed a moral universe. It also very funny. The subplot about Allen making a film about his successful, conceited brother-in-law (Alan Alda.) A masterpiece. I doubt he will reach these heights again.

This is a profound film, a true classic and great even among Woody Allen's great films! Thought-provoking and involving, I've found since seeing it that the film and its statements about good versus evil, denial, guilt, narcissism, have never really left me. A film with many layers, one that demands a re-visiting from time to time.

Not much has to be said. This is an outstanding film, possibly one of the best films I have ever seen. All performances are perfect. Half drama, half comedy, and that very well done. It has deep thoughts about quilt and mistakes, lots of truth about relationships. It has laughs and a perfect ending. Every time I watch this film I just want to sit down and write, just write something interesting to leave behind. The film is already 16 yrs old and you wont notice that at all, it's one of those films that never age. I would recommend this movie to anyone who doesn't want to spend another two hours of his life watching yet another Hollywood crap.