MUBI

Chapter One – I adored Woody Allen. I idolized him all out of proportion. Then he spent the last twelve or so years making crap films and I got over him. Revisiting Manhattan showed me that, unlike the characters in this film, I was not suffering from delusions, but was watching one of the great directors in his prime.

It’s one of the unforgettable openings in film. Stunning black and white images of New York City, while the soundtrack plays Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue, combined with Allen’s narration commenting on what he perceives as his ideal self in his ideal locale. We will soon find out that Allen’s character Isaac, as well as the rest of his flawed entourage, idealizes relationships as well. Here’s what’s brilliant about the opening. By showing NYC in such a magical light, we are being primed to buy into these ideals. Because Isaac is played by Woody Allen, the lovable loser, we may not register that he’s no longer the underdog, but a successful, somewhat selfish man very capable of hurting others.

Isaac spends much of the film trying to justify, continue or end his affair with a 17 year-old high school student. Normally, this would alienate us from him, but it doesn’t, because he’s self aware enough to feel guilt and Mariel Hemmingway’s understated portrayal of Tracy, who she invests with such maturity and smarts, that the relationship seems somewhat less inappropriate. We kind of have to keep reminding ourselves that an affair between a man of 42 and a girl of 17 is wrong. (Yes, this brings us some issues in Woody Allen’s personal life, but I don’t give damn about that. I’m only interested in his films.)

The Diane Keaton and Michael Murphy characters are not much better off. Despite their charm and likeability, they are serial adulterers, smart enough to know better AND to care, but not so smart as to commit to any kind of mature relationship. All this is after the fact analysis that doesn’t take into account how much Manhattan lures us into identifying with these flawed characters. I also haven’t mentioned how damn laugh out loud funny this film is. It contains possibly the sharpest writing of any Allen script, combining humor with a wistful sense of romance and the best looking cinematography Allen’s ever been associated with.

I know, Annie Hall is the more popular film. It’s certainly easier to watch than this film, which focuses on the lives of bored entitled pseudo-intellectuals. However, Manhattan achieves a wider scope because it savagely comments on a group of people that previously were the heroes of his films; intellectual, well-off, over-educated New Yorkers. At the same time, however, the film is more nakedly romantic and more visually self-assured than any of his previous films. It’s the first of Allen’s mature works.

Woody Allen’s seminal masterpiece is a visual representation of his eternal love affair with New York City. The film takes the viewer on a picturesque black and white tour through the town presented as a glimmering cosmopolitan world.

The cast is good but this film is really nothing special it seems like the same old same old. Typical brainy language. This film to me is the epitome of pretentious. It seems more entertaining to the director himself then to the audience watching. It also feels like he is talking down to the audience there seems to be no joy in this film except for using the landscape to help tell the story. This film should have just been better I mean Meryl Streep is in it in a small role but still. So is Wallace Shawn who is more used for dramatic purposes then his expertise of smart comedy in fact he is used in comedy but only as a sight gag for a scene.

overrated!!! sure it has great cinematography and great iconic shots of new york landmarks. but really that’s about it i’m a woody allen fan and i really disliked this film the story is typical allen and seemed like a great idea with a bad follow through. some of the one-liners are good. The only reason for the black and white film instead of color was to try and make this film seem like a classic that seemd to fool the critics. it’s a love story that has no love this film is great more for fans of existentialism and philosophy then a good film

Woody romancing a underage girl who seems to be the only character who is emotionally mature would certainly be a forshadowing not only of his personal life but also as he got older and ended his relationship with Mia Farrow in real life his co-stars in the movies that he appeared with romantically were noticeably younger then him. Of course all the women were in there mid thirties which were usually the age of his female characters before but he kept getting older in his fifties and sixties. I give him respect for his output he writes a comedic script in a month and it takes him 2 months to write a drama but either ay he makes a film a year and I respect him for that and with that kind of work of course some will falter but he has a pretty good average. And obviously he has a audience to keep getting the funding. he also gives actors plenty of material to work with as most of his films are not only all star films but also ensemble pieces. but this is one of those films that shows what I don’t like about woody allen films but having said that he is still one of my favorite filmmakers

Even woody allen hated this film he was so disappointed he asked the studio to pull it and keepit on a shelf and he would direct another movie for the studio for free. This is his least favorite of his films.