Woody Allen is, by filmmaker standards, prolific. He has
made a movie, pretty much like clockwork, every year since Annie Hall in
1977 (except in 1981). His movies are always workmanlike and sometimes much
more than that. His latest feature, Café Society, which opened last
Friday, is not among his better efforts. In fact, it’s pretty mediocre.
Allen is 80 years old, and I’m tempted to say that his age
is catching up with him. But I’d
probably be wrong. Over the past five
years, Woody has written/directed two very good movies, Midnight In Paris
(2011) and Blue Jasmine (2013). Neither was a masterpiece, but they
connected. Midnight in Paris was imaginative, quite witty and true to
itself; while Blue Jasmine, although more flawed, did present a
fascinating, gripping character study, and some great acting from Cate
Blanchette. On the other hand, To Rome with Love (2012) and Magic in
the Moonlight (2014) were just okay – entertaining for a while, generally
well photographed but featuring sloppy, predictable plotting and mostly
uninspired acting. I did not see Irrational Man (2015), but its
reception by other reviewers and the general public was pretty muted.
It sometimes seems to me that Allen no longer pursues
excellence or sees his movie-making as an art form as he once did, but instead
considers writing and directing more like a trade, a gig that he enjoys but
that is not worth a lot of overtime. He seems more concerned with putting out a
decent product on time than creating a truly meaningful or finely crafted picture. As if
just good enough is good enough. This is frustrating to me, because it also
seems that with a little more care, a bit more attention to detail – whether
plot or dialogue or accents or characterizations – some of Allen’s movies (Blue
Jasmine being a prime example) really could have been great.
Which brings me back to Café Society. As is common with Woody Allen, the story takes place in the past, in the 1930s. It seems to be his favorite era – whether because the music speaks to him or it’s the decade of his birth, who knows?So we start with a little nostalgic tone. It’s the story of Bobby (Jesse Eisenberg), a young man from a (very) stereotypically old school Jewish family in the Bronx. Bobby has come to California to try and make his way in the world. He puts himself in the hands of his Uncle Phil (Steve Carrell), his only connection to the West Coast. Phil is a powerful and wealthy Hollywood talent agent/manager, who knows everybody, wheels and deals constantly, lives in a grand L.A. house, yada yada. So we get a teensy bit of satirical takes on the L.A. scene, but nothing sharp or new.
Entering Phil’s office, Bobby is immediately smitten by his receptionist,
Vonnie (Kristen Stewart), who is then assigned to show him around town (since Bobby knows nobody) – and a
budding romance ensues (of course). But (of course) there is an impediment:
Vonnie is kind of engaged to another guy. But then her fiancé calls it off
because he can’t leave his wife, and Bobby and Vonnie’s romance starts to blossom.
But alas, Vonnie’s ex-fiance actually does leave his wife; he proposes again; and
she decides to marry him (he’s already older and established, whereas Bobby is
all potential). Who is this other guy? I’m not saying.
Bobby gives up and, heartbroken, returns to New York, gets a
job at the nightclub owned by his gangster brother, Ben (Corey Stoll). Over
time he thrives, the nightclub is a huge success, the money rolls in, he meets and
marries the lovely Veronica (Blake Lively), they have a kid, and so on. Still,
Bobby harbors a secret passion for Vonnie, but what’re you gonna do? There is a lot more detail, needless to say,
much of which comes to us via a narration voiced by Woody himself, which in its
persistence egregiously violates the age-old cinematic rule: show us, don’t tell us.
Quite a lot of the humor in Café Society comes via
the sardonic voice-over, most of the rest comes in the form of shtick: the
caricatured Jewish family, the light, almost goofy treatment of the violent gangster
business style, and a scene early on in which Bobby engages a call girl only to
discover that she’s Jewish (and a novice in the profession at that). Actually
the prostitute scene, though ostensibly played for awkward laughs (ha ha ha - a
Jew hooker!) isn’t much fun. The rest of the movie seems intended to be taken
more seriously as a meditation on life’s twists, turns, disappointments and
missed opportunities, through the lens of an unfulfilled romantic love. Allen’s
use of lighthearted period music throughout tends to undercut whatever
emotional response the story is supposed to evoke, however. That and the fact
that the multifaceted story lacks focus and tries to do too many things at
once.
I’m painting a negative picture, but Café Society does have some good things going for it. Eisenberg is quite good as Bobby. It’s frequently the case that the male lead in a Woody Allen film acts as a stand in for Woody, basically the role he used to give himself in the early days – and that is the case here. Indeed, Eisenberg, being a better actor, handles Woody’s dialogue and movie persona more credibly than the writer-director ever did, and perhaps even better than Owen Wilson did in Midnight
In Paris, with a similar assignment. Bobby shows a lot of emotional growth
and increasing physical maturity over the course of the film. The latter may be
partially aided by the stylists and makeup people, but most of the credit goes
to the actor. On the other hand, although Stewart is capable of fine work (e.g.
Clouds of Sils Maria [2014]), she is lovely, but just ok here. The rest
of the cast is fine, but largely one dimensional in limited roles.
Cinematographer Vittorio Storaro, known for his outstanding
work in such pictures as Apocalypse Now (1979), Reds (1981) and The
Sheltering Sky (1990), is in excellent form here – the visuals are
terrific, especially in the L.A. scenes and the New York nightclub. The
screenplay has several witty lines, some of which are featured in Cafe
Society’s trailer, but it is rather weak in the moments where it needs to
be strongest: the love scenes between Eisenberg and Stewart.
All in all, as I said at the outset, a mediocre effort. If
you’re an avid fan of Woody’s movies or of Eisenberg, go see it. Otherwise, you
may want to give this one a pass – at least until it becomes available online.
96 minutes.
In wide release.
No comments:
Post a Comment