web
counter
 

The Incontinental

By Brian Prisco | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (13)



2010_you_will_meet_a_tall_dark_stranger_001.jpg

A New York Jew does not a British colonial make. Woody Allen seems to be going through the motions in his old age. If he’s trying to make films for his peer group — and by that I mean elderly folks who politely titter at the jokes scattered like bread crusts at a duck pond — then by Jove, he’s hit his mark. But if he’s not trying to make flicks for the sub-AARP crew, he’s failing. You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger feels less like a coherent plot than an extended trailer for a really poor comedy of errors. Essentially, we watch four different relationships fall apart and destroy the relationships around them in a structure built as flimsily as an Angry Birds level. Allen’s narration is usually one of the most forgivable parts of his films, but in this flick, it’s such a cement patch for what feels like an unfinished effort. The acting is kind of embarrassing, especially considering the names involved, and the dialogue is noticeably atrocious. It’s kind of like the “Jersey Shore” hosebeasts doing The Importance of Being Earnest. You almost wish Soon Yi had fucked Woody to death so he could at least have gone with a bang and not a Viagra joke.

Anthony Hopkins does a terrible Woody Allen impression as Alfie, an elderly man who leaves his wife because Woody Allen still has a few more mid-life crisis jokes to make. He ends up in a relationship with a prostitute (Lucy Punch), who he marries even though she looks like Hedwig from the neck up and the penis down. His wife Helena (Gemma Jones) felt she lost him because she was too honest with him, and not because she’s a blunt and nosy naggard. She ends up getting lured in by a belief in the paranormal, hence the psychic-based flim-flam title. She starts courting a local New Age bookseller, Jonathan (Roger Ashton-Griffiths), who still harbors a love for his deceased wife. Helena and Alfie have a daughter Sally (Naomi Watts), an art gallery assistant who’s married to a failing American novelist Roy (Josh Brolin), who’s struggling to pen his second novel. Of course, they aren’t happy and are looking for a little exotic takeaway, with Naomi crushing on her exotic boss Greg (Antonio Banderas) and Roy pining for the musician in red across the way Dia (Frieda Pinto). Sure, Greg’s married, and he’s also apparently banging Sally’s artist friend, and Dia’s engaged, but who cares, this is about what you want NOW, not about repercussions or any of that committed relationship hoo-hah.

If that’s not confusing enough, there’s at least four or five additional subplots. Sally’s trying to open her own gallery, Roy tries to steal his dead friend’s novel, Alfie’s trying to catch his hooker in the hitch, and Helena’s supporting both Sally and Roy. For as much shit that’s going on in the story, the entire thing feels really slapdash and piecemeal. It bounds from moment to moment at a bizarre scattered pace, like a drunk learning to drive stick in a bumper car. Months and weeks blast forward, and they don’t spend any time really developing any of the relationships. Shit happens is a T-shirt slogan, not the way you should arc your screenplay. And Woody Allen should fucking know better. And Josh Brolin should only ever play vaguely seedy Texas flavored badasses.

Woody Allen’s been trading on his good name for the past two decades, with a really shameful record. He completely wastes his cast here. Granted, aside from Josh Brolin, nobody’s really been lighting up the silver screen as of late, but still, with this caliber of actor, Allen should be killing this. I don’t understand this overwhelming Eurocentric thing he’s been rocking as of late. It’s funny, because the last thing he wrote that I somewhat enjoyed was a leftover set in New York. At least he’s moved off his ScarJo obsession and the terrible fucking dramas. Yet, Allen seems hellbent on making his legacy that all conventional love is fucking bullshit and we should basically just fuck around until we die — which makes sense then that he’d set everything in Europe. Only Europeans can pull off infidelity as charming.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Superman/Batman: Apocalypse Review | There Goes My Hero, Watch Him As He Goes | Oh, Pretty Girls, You're Too Good For This | The Asshole Phenomenon









Comments

Nice Angry Birds reference.

Posted by: Neodiogenes at October 7, 2010 1:34 PM

Rich people's problems.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at October 7, 2010 1:38 PM

The problem I've always had with Woody Allen movies is that I say, "Oh, that was I joke," but I don't laugh. I get the jokes. They just aren't funny.

Posted by: BWeaves at October 7, 2010 1:41 PM

BWeaves: WORD.

Prisco, thank you for reminding me that a delightful word like "hosebeast" exists--I'd forgotten about it in the years since Wayne's World was released. I shall try to use it in sentence today.

Posted by: Jessie at October 7, 2010 1:51 PM

The problem I have with Woody Allen movies is that he perverts every actor, no matter how talented, into his stammering, neurotic doppelganger. Hated that Barcelona movie for this reason (despite the Cruz/Johansson love) because I couldn't help but visualize both of the female leads as decrepit, balding, old Jewish men.

Anyway, that self-deprecatory nervous patter shtick got old 20 years ago.

Posted by: Neodiogenes at October 7, 2010 2:00 PM

Had to immediately commend you on the Angry Birds reference.

Bravo.

Now, back to the review.

... aww screw it. I think I'll play me some Angry Birds instead.

Posted by: The Chief at October 7, 2010 2:00 PM

Anthony Hopkins does a terrible Woody Allen impression

And thank goodness. I don't WANT to see Sir Anthony Hopkins act like Woody Allen and Woody Fucking Allen should be drug out and shot for trying to make Anthony Hopkins do such a thing.

P.S. I do not like Woody Allen.

Posted by: PaulterA at October 7, 2010 2:16 PM

I read some interview with him where he said that filming in Europe is easier and less-expensive, so maybe that has something to do with it. I will not be seeing this movie, it seriously looks terrible.

Posted by: Dorothy Snarker at October 7, 2010 3:26 PM

He's already said he makes his movies in Europe because people pay him to. I'm sure he's still be in the Upper East Side if he could afford it.

Posted by: steve at October 7, 2010 3:27 PM

Woody Allen is overrated.

Posted by: Slash at October 7, 2010 3:51 PM

*weeps for Naomi Watts*

Posted by: , at October 7, 2010 5:04 PM

I really like the movie. There is a huge pressure to make each screenplay a certain way and I respect Woody Allen a lot for playing with the rules and bending them. I also liked the theme, and the acting, and I liked the 'unfinished' touch at the end. And I enjoyed all the ‘so called imperfections’ that the reviewers notice. Because they were different than the ‘rule’ therefore fresh. There was no need for further explanation at the end. The movie made me think, feel, and recognize situations from my life. I am also very much into paranormal and divination, have been practicing it for a long time. How often do we see movies that explore an idea and not just follow the plot of A wants/needs the impossible B in the first 10 minutes of the screenplay? One other thing I would like to ad: What reviewers forget is that any artist can deliver masterpieces once or twice in his life, if any. But to "slaughter" an artist each time he doesn't blow you away or a deliver a masterpiece, is barbaric. The movie didn't blow me away, but reinforced my big admiration for Woody Allen, and offered me an enjoyable evening. Perhaps this is not a guy's movie, because none of the elements are extreme. But the movie has charm and subtlety, which are two qualities rare to be seen in modern American comedies.

Posted by: Artsy in New York, NY at October 18, 2010 11:59 PM

I really like the movie. There is a huge pressure to make each screenplay a certain way and I respect Woody Allen a lot for playing with the rules and bending them. I also liked the theme, and the acting, and I liked the 'unfinished' touch at the end. And I enjoyed all the ‘so called imperfections’ that the reviewers notice. Because they were different than the ‘rule’ therefore fresh. There was no need for further explanation at the end. The movie made me think, feel, and recognize situations from my life. I am also very much into paranormal and divination, have been practicing it for a long time. How often do we see movies that explore an idea and not just follow the plot of A wants/needs the impossible B in the first 10 minutes of the screenplay? One other thing I would like to ad: What reviewers forget is that any artist can deliver masterpieces once or twice in his life, if any. But to "slaughter" an artist each time he doesn't blow you away or a deliver a masterpiece, is barbaric. The movie didn't blow me away, but reinforced my big admiration for Woody Allen, and offered me an enjoyable evening. Perhaps this is not a guy's movie, because none of the elements are extreme. But the movie has charm and subtlety, which are two qualities rare to be seen in modern American comedies.

Posted by: Artsy in New York, NY at October 19, 2010 12:04 AM