Cassandra's Dream (Woody Allen, 2008)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Antoine Doinel
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Contact:

#26 Post by Antoine Doinel » Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:39 am

Yikes. Here's the ugly poster.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#27 Post by tavernier » Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:48 am

Antoine Doinel wrote:Yikes. Here's the ugly poster.
"Yikes" is right....and where is the fucking question mark?

User avatar
exte
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: NJ

#28 Post by exte » Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:53 am

Am I the only one who hates Colin Farrell? Still, the poster may be in line with the theme of the movie, you never know...

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

#29 Post by domino harvey » Sat Jun 23, 2007 1:07 am

wow, that poster is... wow

User avatar
Kirkinson
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:34 am
Location: Portland, OR

#30 Post by Kirkinson » Sat Jun 23, 2007 4:13 am

Antoine Doinel wrote:Yikes. Here's the ugly poster.
Not only does that poster make no mention of the Weinsteins or their company, it's just too bad to possibly be real (I hope).

User avatar
Dylan
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm

#31 Post by Dylan » Fri Aug 17, 2007 11:39 pm

French trailer

Despite the general tone of the presentation (which actually leads me to suspect that this is really the American trailer with French subs and logos), this looks very impressive and intense.

User avatar
jorencain
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:45 am

#32 Post by jorencain » Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:50 am

Wow. I'm not sure what to think....the trailer makes it look like a non-descript thriller, but I'm hoping I'll love it (as I do with almost all of his stuff). I'm excited to see a new direction in Allen's films; I just hope he delivers the goods with this.

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

#33 Post by rs98762001 » Sat Aug 18, 2007 2:34 pm

There should be a law against Woody Allen writing dialogue for the British. That line about "a two-bit player" is just hilarious. NOBODY has spoken that way in England for about 50 years. This looks as silly and fake as Match Point.

User avatar
jorencain
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:45 am

#34 Post by jorencain » Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:30 pm

But when has his dialogue ever been realistic? I love his dialogue, but I've never heard anybody ever speak like the characters in his films do, British or American.

User avatar
tryavna
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:38 pm
Location: North Carolina

#35 Post by tryavna » Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:39 pm

Yeah, criticizing the dialogue in a Woody Allen movie for being unrealistic is like criticizing the dialogue in film noir or Preston Sturges. You know going in that it's going to have an idiosyncratic and stylized quality.

Or maybe RS just perceives Allen's dialogue in his American films as accurately reflecting the lingo of NYC? Perhaps, he's got a point. Herr Schreck has an Allen-esque facility with language.

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

#36 Post by rs98762001 » Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:19 pm

Both good points. But there's still good dialogue and bad dialogue. I think, in uprooting himself from the NYC idiom which he clearly knows inside and out, Allen's placed himself on shaky, unfamiliar ground. The context of his American movies allows for his characters' speech to feel credible. But hearing Ewan in a dodgy cockney accent saying "I'm just a two-bit player myself who plays a big shot at borrowed cars" and "You are so beautiful and talented" strips away any semblance of realism for me. Maybe if I wasn't a Brit myself, I wouldn't notice it as much (as I said above, it irritated me no end in Match Point as well).

User avatar
Antoine Doinel
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Contact:

#37 Post by Antoine Doinel » Sun Aug 19, 2007 11:25 am

Great trailer. It seems all the usual Allen themes are in play. I'm really looking forward to it.

User avatar
Jeff
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

#38 Post by Jeff » Sun Sep 02, 2007 5:03 pm

Ouch. Here are the opening paragraphs of The Hollywood Reporter's review from Venice:
Woody Allen's "Cassandra's Dream" is a humorless misfire that wastes the talents of some fine actors including Ewan McGregor, Hayley Atwell and Tom Wilkinson while continuing the mystery of Colin Farrell's appeal to major filmmakers.

As writer, Allen offers lazy plotting, poor characterization, dull scenes and flat dialogue. As director, he makes no demands on the abundant talents of cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond and composer Philip Glass. He employs predictable and illogical London and countryside locations. And he abandons good players to do what they can with the material at hand while allowing Farrell to mumble his way through another indifferent performance.

The film, screened in the Venice Masters sidebar of the Venice International Film Festival, has minimal boxoffice prospects, and only McGregor and Allen completists are likely to want it on their DVD shelf.

User avatar
Antoine Doinel
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Contact:

#39 Post by Antoine Doinel » Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:20 am

Can we please call for a moratorium on critics sighing over how "humorless" this film is? Honestly, have they not seen any other of Allen's dramatic films? It's not like this is the first one. Frankly, I can't take any review that bemoans the lack of laughs seriously. What they hell were they expecting?

Here is the the Independent's thoroughly patronizing and bizarrely misinformed review of the film. They even go so far as to call him a "clown determined to be taken seriously". The reviewer also wants to "shake Allen and tell him to lighten up". Moreover, the reviewer wonders how a person who reveres the Marx Brothers and Bob Hope could make something so unfunny. Perhaps he forgot to read the part about Bergman being a huge influence on Allen as well.

User avatar
Dylan
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm

#40 Post by Dylan » Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:12 pm

Yeah, nothing in the modern world of critical analysis arouses more suspicion in me than a negative review of a dramatic Woody Allen film saying that he needs to stick to comedy. I mean, isn't everybody over that in 2007?

Anyway, here is a great article from the TimesOnline:

[quote]Allen finds a better quality of misery
by Dalya Alberge, Arts Correspondent

He is the quintessential New Yorker but Woody Allen says he would love to make another movie in London. “The weather is cool and the skies are grey, which is very good for the kind of dramas I like to do,â€

rs98762001
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:04 pm

#41 Post by rs98762001 » Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:52 pm

If anything, critics have bent over backwards to be fair to Allen recently. Match Point and even the execrable Scoop got far warmer receptions than they deserved. But it seems the response to this one is almost uniformly negative. Perhaps it's not that they don't understand Woody's dramatic intentions, but that the film simply sucks.

User avatar
Kirkinson
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:34 am
Location: Portland, OR

#42 Post by Kirkinson » Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:38 pm

rs98762001 wrote:Perhaps it's not that they don't understand Woody's dramatic intentions, but that the film simply sucks.
Even if Cassandra's Dream was the worst film ever made it wouldn't validate this particular criticism. If a reviewer tells me a tragedy is "humorless" as if that's not to be expected, and they offer no further explanation as to why the tragedy should not be humorless, I really can't understand what they're arguing against. If it was supposed to funny, fine. Otherwise, the only way it makes sense to me on its own is if by "humor" the reviewer was talking about a personality or characteristic disposition. But using the word "humorless" in that sense seems unnecessarily and unusually obscure.

This reminds me of one of my pet peeves, critics and reviewers scolding a film for being "nihilistic" without making the slightest effort to think about why the film might be presenting that viewpoint, as if the word "nihilistic" is self-evidently critical. I think the same applies here; the onus is on the critic to tell me why it's necessarily a bad thing that Woody Allen isn't trying to be funny. If the drama doesn't work, focus on why the drama itself doesn't work.

User avatar
Jeff
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

#43 Post by Jeff » Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:53 pm

Variety's review indicates that the comments about the "comedy" may not be entirely off the mark. It sounds like whatever it is, it doesn't really work.
Like a tragic overture played at the wrong tempo and slightly off-key, Woody Allen's London-set "Cassandra's Dream" sends out more mixed signals than an inebriated telegraphist. On the face of it a "serious Woody," following two brothers embroiled in murder, pic is actually a low-key, bumpy black comedy whose humor stems from the perhaps deliberate awkwardness of the characterizations and dialogue. A relatively easy sit, thanks to energetic perfs by Ewan McGregor and Colin Farrell, pic still fails to satisfy fully on any level.

User avatar
Kirkinson
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:34 am
Location: Portland, OR

#44 Post by Kirkinson » Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:26 pm

Thank you. That's exactly the sort of thing I was asking for.

User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm

#45 Post by Barmy » Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:27 pm

I'm liking the Colin Farrell hatred, at any rate.

User avatar
Dylan
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm

#46 Post by Dylan » Thu Sep 06, 2007 2:18 pm


User avatar
exte
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: NJ

#47 Post by exte » Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:45 pm

Dylan wrote:From YouTube:

Woody Allen turns camera on London
I hate to say it, but he doesn't look to be in the best health... I hope he's okay, and was just really tired or something.

User avatar
Dylan
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm

#48 Post by Dylan » Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:21 pm

A positive blurb from Jason Solomons of Guardian Unlimited:
It's [Cassandra's Dream] a strange film and I think rather brilliant. But it is very moody, and tragic as two brothers (Ewan McGregor and Colin Farrell) head towards the bleakest ending I can recall in Woody's work.

People here seemed, in the main, to think it was rotten, like an episode of EastEnders. It upsets me that people really don't like Woody anymore. This is a fascinating late work from a great artist. The direction may be a bit unflashy these days and the accents are ropey, but the score from Philip Glass is terrific, London is a stifling and foreboding backdrop and the tale is the stuff of Greek drama. You simply don't see this on film any more.

User avatar
Dylan
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm

#49 Post by Dylan » Sun Sep 09, 2007 8:18 pm

Another piece from Solomons:
Happy to be in Woody's world

Jason Solomons
Sunday September 9, 2007
The Observer

Bumping into charming British actress Sally Hawkins was only the start. Giggling with mischief, Sally - who's superb in Woody Allen's Cassandra's Dream - led me into the exclusive drinks party before their premiere. Colin Farrell was there already, drinking with several mates. Ewan was late. 'Christ, how long does a Jedi need to put on make up?' joked Colin.

Then Woody arrived, introducing Soon-Yi to his actors, moving slowly through the photographers and well wishers. 'Oh, I see the Dublin mafia is here,' he said, looking at Farrell's burly gang of pals. I'd been worried about Woody - his latest film has a depressive, dread air - and at the earlier press conference he'd seemed quiet and withdrawn, unable to engage in eye contact or work the earphones that translate Italian questions. He looked thin and pale. 'Don't worry about him,' said Hayley Atwell, who also stars in the film. 'It's all an act. He's very happy, he's got a wonderful life and he's very funny. He just gets bored with the questions because he's five steps ahead of everyone and his brain's onto the next thing.'

Five days earlier, Woody had completed filming in Barcelona, with Penelope Cruz, Scarlett Johansson and Javier Bardem. He hasn't come up with a title for the new film yet. 'It's what we used to call in America a comedy drama,' he'd revealed earlier. 'A dramatic piece in which funny things happen along the way.'

Then came my moment. Woody was alone. I shuffled over. I told him that one of my most treasured gifts from my recent wedding was a black-and-white portrait of him, taken and signed by Observer photographer Jane Bown. 'Oh, I remember that one,' he smiled. 'She was very good actually - I like the way she works, very quickly, no fuss, no fancy lighting.'

I told him that, apart from my wife's, his was the last face I saw before sleeping at night as the photograph was still in my bedroom, but that I would be putting it up as soon as I got home. 'Not to use as a dartboard, I hope,' said Woody. I laughed and he smiled and there it was - a flash of the old clown. 'No, I liked the film,' I said. 'If I hadn't, then maybe ... but I'm a bad shot anyway.' He shook my hand and said with a twinkle: 'Well, practise hard.' Bullseye. Woody's back.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#50 Post by tavernier » Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:19 am

It's too bad that after all the great music he's put in his films--with the tops being Prokofiev in Love and Death and the last Schubert quartet in Crimes and Misdemeanors--he pollutes his newest film's soundtrack with Philip Glass's dreck.

Post Reply