O Homem Irracional

A tight script? Check. Capable actors? Check. Lots of witty dialogue? Check. A jazzy soundtrack? Check. Beautiful photography in idyllic settings? Check.

Yes, all the ingredients are there. Just leave it to the 79-year old chef to create a delicious dish out of it. When everything is right, a Woody Allen movie is a delight to watch. And with 'Irrational Man', this is absolutely the case.

Joaquin Phoenix and Emma Stone are clearly enjoying themselves as the grumpy philosophy professor and his admiring student and lover. Allen's script plays in a lighthearted way with serious philosophical concepts such as guilt, evil and righteousness. Also, he throws in a murder mystery and makes the suspense last until the very end.

'Irrational Man' will not be one of Allen's greatest movies, because it lacks an extraordinary element like Cate Blanchett's performance in 'Blue Jasmine', or the historical dimension of 'Midnight in Paris'. But even without such an extra ingredient, 'Irrational Man' shows an expert craftsman at work. In a couple of years time, it might just turn out to be one of his most underrated films.

An interesting and enjoyable watch, but a little slow at times. Irrational Man is one of those movies where going in blind will certainly make for a better experience. Emma Stone gives a great performance in this and Joaquin Phoenix is amazing as always, and for the most part there is some great dialogue and chemistry between them. Probably would've been a much lower rating if not for Joaquin Pheonix's performance, who I am yet to see in a bad movie. It isn't the masterpiece I was hoping for from a Woody Allen film, and certainly does not compare to Midnight in Paris or Blue Jasmine, but it's still an enjoyable one and worth a watch.

Joaquin Phoenix is still one of the best an most interesting actors working today, and Emma Stone, who is just getting better and better is one of the most enjoyable actresses to watch just now. In Irrational Man, Phoenix plays a college professor who is new to the campus where Stone's character studies, although his reputation proceeds him, as students and lecturers alike are abuzz with excitement over his arrival. Men can't figure him out and women cling to him despite his paunch and nonchalance, never mind his unconventional teaching methods in philosophy. What ensues is a friendship between Phoenix and Stone that grows over her affection for him, and by way of a conversation heard in a diner that puts a local judge in poor light because he's in a position to strip a seemingly good mother of the rights to see her children. This puts the movie in familiar territory for anyone who has seen Rope, but also Allen's own Match Point, Love and Death and Crimes and Misdemeanors, where the morality and immorality of murder is discussed. Which puts Phoenix in an interesting position as a philosophy professor with some very frank and matter-of-fact ideas about life and living. And he plays this well, without channeling his director in the way other actors have in the past, but creating a character who is smart, troubled and very inviting. There's a world weariness and a nervous energy in Phoenix that's countered by Stone's wide-eyed optimism and inherently decent qualities, which are traits that she encompasses so very well as an actress. She's easy to get on side with just as Phoenix is always able to invite viewers into the mind of the characters he plays. But it's Allen's script that underwhelms, if not his framing and staging of conversational scenes. Questions and ideas are posed without enough attached to them, although the stakes may be high, the narrative is familiar and one could expect Jessica Fletcher or Columbo to be involved in such a story. Whilst the frequent use of the Ramsey Lewis Trio's The In Crowd has meaning, but not enough purpose in how this become a theme for the movie. Which I quite liked, because I like Murder She Wrote, Columbo and Diagnosis Murder, and that's really the territory Allen is in here. But it's far from his best, although his work-ethic is remarkable, along with the fact that he isn't guilty of missing the mark or making poor movies, even when he's coasting.

Sometimes a guy can't catch a break, and it may be for good reason. With Woody Allen and the critics of Irrational Man, one may think there's a rational reason, no clever spin intended. Here's a man who is spectacular at what he does, but he doesn't have the most immense range of the American iconoclast-auteurs - by this point, after writing films for 50 years and directing for over 45, critics and most audiences get the gist of what the man works with: some occasional fantasy, light-hearted comedy, serious, brooding drama, romance, mystery, magic, existentialism and the separation of reality and fantasy. But for myself, I went into this trying to take it just on its own terms: does it work as its own story, as to what it's trying to do, with or without the author's baggage? I think it does, often quite well, and it makes a sort of cap to an unexpected, thematic trilogy of movies, which I'll get to in a moment.

In Irrational Man it starts out like what seems to be a story of a philosophy professor (Phoenix) caught in despair, while an eager, bright student (Stone) starts to fancy him. He's blocked, he can't seem to write (or "sleep with" Parker Posey's character early on), and he drinks fairly heavily (Phoenix adds a pot belly to the mix). But its main turning point turns it into what is a Hitchcockian tale of murder and deception, all due to eavesdropping on the sad tale of a cruel judge presiding over a custody case. It turns this professor's life around, albeit with a rather dark twist.

By Hitchcockian it's easy to throw that label around, but this is a filmmaker who has previously used a scene from Shadow of a Doubt (I forget which movie, but I remember characters watching it in one of his films), and now has some elements taken from it. Hey, how about a discussion in a very lively, satirical manner about the best way to go about a murder? Or what if it's a complete stranger with a poison of some kind? At the same time Allen throws in Emma Stone, once again after 'Moonlight' but here now modern and always great to look at as a star on screen with full-on talent and energy to burn with her co-star. Phoenix, meanwhile, gets a lot of this man's despair, and then his odd joy too - though Phoenix may not seem like the most spot-on actor to show 'energy' in the later half of the film, he is still completely there for what this character requires.

What I liked about Irrational Man, even with some of its familiarity in the Allen world - professor with a younger student romantically, questions of morality, what it means when PURE luck really defines what happens for people - is that it was genuine about how its characters saw and changed with their views on the world, and that on its own you get wrapped up in the question of "Will he really get away with this?" To be sure, this question was asked with greater intellectual rigor in Crimes & Misdemeanors, and Match Point had an even tougher, bleaker view of what it means for people to get ahead in the world no matter who stands in heir way. But all three of these movies seem to make up a trilogy - maybe we can call it his 'Dostoyevsky' series - with this one being what I should think is the capper of them. Now it's not an older businessman or a young upstart, but someone who has spent his life trying to figure out what it means to live a meaningful life in theory vs practice.

It may be the literalness of this comparison that will throw off some viewers. That and/or the narration. I have to say that is the one thing I'm really unsure of after seeing it for the first time; on the one hand it works with the realm of film noir, as in here are characters who are constantly plotting or trying to think their way through some sort of emotional or moral logic (and the moment where the plot really kicks off, it seems hard for me to figure how it could be done without voice-over), but on the other there are moments where it is too much, that a moment could work without the character's direction. On the other hand again, it's an existential comedy that takes itself very seriously, or a semi-romantic and dramatic love story that has some light touches (and that ending!) Irrational Man isn't great, but it's very good, exceeding any expectations I could've had, in large part thanks to a cast and, by the way, some really skillful and beautiful direction on the whole (and the warm cinematography, all shot in Newport, Rhode Island). I'll be curious if this gets re-evaluated in 10-15 years.

I enjoyed this even more than my rating suggests and I haven't scored it higher because it didn't make me want to see it again straightaway, which is basically my rationale for giving a film tops. Why not? Because, I think, I simply loved everything about this film and sat smiling and tingling not sure what was coming next but loving it all and I don't think all that would happen second time. Daft? Yes, maybe but certainly this is a must see film, perfectly constructed with full on comedic script and intelligent and sparkling dialogue. There is even a bit of action! Woody gives a nod here to Strangers on a Train but i think he he were honest there is even more of 'Dexter'. Its that clever mix of logic, rationality, morality, sin and humour. Lots of little things amused me, I particularly liked the elements of 'chance' and the astute and sharp critiques of various philosophers. i also enjoyed being surprised and never quite knowing where this was going - just loving the ride. This is most defiantly like 'one of those early funny ones, indeed we may have to start referring to 'those later funny ones' if Woody Allen carries on at this rate. Excellent.