Review of Manhattan (1979) by Daniel K — 06 Feb 2012

4: Now that Annie Hall and Manhattan have been released on Blu-Ray, I decided to have a Woody Allen masterpiece day. Annie Hall, then Midnight in Paris, and finally Manhattan. Granted, this probably wasn't quite the appropriate order in which to view them, but it worked just the same.

Allen has an incredibly distinctive and memorable voice, whether or not he is in the film and regardless of whether the film is from the 70's or this past year. I haven't seen all the Best Picture nominees, but I suspect Midnight in Paris is the most deserving of taking the award home.

The main thing that struck me about watching three Allen pictures in a row is that they might as well all be part of the same picture. They essentially deal with exactly the same issues; they have similar plotlines; and they have the same characters, whether or not they are actually played the same actors or not.

Annie Hall and Manhattan might as well be Act I and Act II of an overly long, but very entertaining and enlightening film. Manhattan is Allen's love letter to New York, while Midnight in Paris is his more recent love letter to Paris.

However, as Allen's avatar (Owen Wilson, who Heath and I saw running one day in Central Park; you could recognize him by his nose from several hundred feet away) says in the film, he is most in love with cities, regardless of whether Paris or New York.

As long as it is a great city, Allen will have something to say about it, and the message will probably sound remarkably similar no matter where the picture is set. Annie Hall is without a a doubt the most adventurous and vibrant of the three films.

The style just seems so fresh, unique, and different. It's like nothing we've ever seen before. Manhattan is a bit more conventional, but still rather special. Midnight in Paris seems much more conventional, commercial, and polished.

Some might say this is a bad thing, and I would occasionally, but not in this instance. There is nothing wrong with polished. It's as if Allen has worked out all the kinks over the years until his technique is simply glistening with wit, beauty, and sophistication.

He doesn't need to dazzle us anymore with his virtuosity; he simply knows how to make a great film. Similarly, I don't think he was wise enough in the 70's to have made a film of this depth.

Annie Hall and Manhattan both explain to us that relationships and love, whether for another human or a city, are part of what makes life worth living. The message is essentially the same here, but it is a little more subtly complex.

Relationships and great art, as exemplified by cities themselves, can still make life worthwhile, but he's added the notion that one should strive to be satisfied with their lot in life (this isn't exactly right and it's a bit crude, but it seems to be kind of what he is telling us).

One shouldn't live in the past, as it really wasn't any better than the present. One should look and move forward rather than backwards. Annie Hall is without a doubt the most classic feeling of three pictures.

Manhattan is also rather timeless. It's too early to tell with Midnight in Paris, but I nonetheless prefer it to both of the other earlier mappings of Allen's psyche. It really is incredible how similar many of the films are, right down to Zelda Fitzgerald.