Woody Allen Tagged Articles at Cinematical

Indie Roundup reviews the past week of news from the independent film community and provides a peek at what's coming soon.

Openings. This weekend will finally see the release of Kathryn Bigelow's The Hurt Locker, an extraordinary, ticking time bomb of a movie. Michelle Pfeiffer returns to the screen in Stephen Frears' "scandalous romp" Cheri. The very timely Iranian tale The Stoning of Soraya M., which just played the Los Angeles Film Festival, should ignite further discussion. Afghan Star features four women who (literally) risk everything in a televised singing contest.

Box Office. Woody Allen's Whatever Works performed just fine, pulling in $29,574 per-screen at nine locations. The re-issue of 1947's Brighton Rock (a very good film starring Richard Attenborough as a small-time hood) drew $10,626 at one theater; Nazi zombie flick Dead Snow scared up $5,363 in business. Several films expanded: Duncan Jones' Moon to 21 theaters ($8,541 per screen), Francis Ford Coppola's Tetro to eight locations ($7,176 per screen), and Sam Mendes' Away We Go to 132 theaters ($6,600 per screen).

Deals. Our friends at indieWIRE provided details on the acquisition of Stanley Tucci's Blind Date (due in theaters late this summer or early fall) and West of Pluto, directed by Henry Bernadet and Myriam Verreault. Pluto screens tonight at the Los Angeles Film Festival (LAFF).

Trailer. Also screening at LAFF this week is Bob Byington's Harmony and Me, which revolves around a 20-something musician (Justin Rice) who still pines for his dearly departed girlfriend. The film has been showing up at festivals all over the place, and the trailer has a good, bouncy vibe.

After the jump: Watch the trailer for Harmony and Me! Plus, more on LAFF.

Whatever Works' title is the mantra of inveterate curmudgeon Boris Yellnikoff (Larry David), as well as that of Woody Allen, whose latest – and first to be set in his beloved Manhattan since 2004's Melinda and Melinda – hews as tightly to his trademark preoccupations as Of Mice and Men's Lenny clung to his rabbit. Casting David makes sense, as the Curb Your Enthusiasm star's crotchety on-screen persona more than slightly recalls that of Allen's. Yet rather than an inspired meeting of kindred minds, their collaboration does little except reinforce the notion that Allen's creative well has long since run dry, his films now split into either inert, heavy-handed, detached spectacles of pretty people doing naughty things in foreign locales (Match Point, Vicky Cristina Barcelona), or leaden comedic larks in which notable names embody Allen's archetypal kvetching role.

An erudite string-theory professor and all-around misanthrope with suicidal tendencies and an extensive vocabulary, David's Boris grumps and grouches like countless other Allen protagonists, right down to his guiding philosophy that the world is a cold, random place full of regret and misery, and that any rare chances at happiness should be seized.

If you were one of the people fantasizing about a nasty courtroom battle between the fashion outlet American Apparel and Woody Allen, get ready to be disappointed. It was announced on Monday, that Allen,"...had accepted a $5 million settlement in his lawsuit against the manufacturer, American Apparel, and Dov Charney, its founder and chief executive." Now if you remember, Allen had launched a suit against AA for at least $10 million after the clothier used an image from Allen's film, Annie Hall, of the director dressed as a Rabbi. When Allen found out about the ad, plenty of name-calling ensued, and AA's lawyers were ready and willing to take their fight to court in hopes of proving that Allen's image wasn't even worth that much thanks to his scandalous past.

Most of Allen's fans saw the incident as a clear-cut case of copyright infringement, but Charney and AA had a different take on their use of the image. In discussions with AA's PR representative, I confirmed that AA had intended the billboard to be a comment on the public perception of AA as a brand; or to put it in movie terms, AA was the Alvy Singer to the media's Grammie Hall. Sure, it's a good use of a movie reference, and I do see their point. But something isn't clicking when on one hand Charney says, "My intention was to call upon people to see beyond media and lawsuit-inspired scandal, and to consider people for their true value and for their contribution to society" and at the same time he was mounting a legal defense that seemed to be the opposite of his intentions (you can read Charney's full statement about the case on their website).

When I wrote about Nicole Kidman signing up for the next Woody Allen film in March, I bit my tongue and didn't mention my doubts. While I knew she could handle the material, I had a sneaking suspicion that it wouldn't come to fruition. This was not because I can see the future, but because many projects that she signs on for she inevitably exits -- Manderlay, The Reader, The Producers, Mr. and Mrs. Smith, etc.

And now she's out of Allen's latest ensemble piece, according to Variety. While she was a solid addition to the cast that boasts the likes of Antonio Banderas, Anthony Hopkins, Josh Brolin, Naomi Watts, and Freida Pinto, there's now a big hole to fill before production kicks off in London this summer. So the big question is: Who will fill it this time, and who should?

For the films I mentioned above, Kidman was replaced with Bryce Dallas Howard, Kate Winslet, Uma Thurman, and of course, Angelina Jolie. (What a different world we'd be in if Pitt was matched with Kidman...) In other words, there's no tried and true Kidman replacement -- they run the gamut. Personally, I'd like to see someone like Maggie Gyllenhaal or Julie Delpy take over, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Woody's beloved ScarJo come to the rescue.

Who would you cast?

If you had to pick someone to play a (slightly) younger version of Woody Allen, it'd pretty much have to be Larry David, right? Both men are overtly Jewish, neurotic, self-obsessed, and often pretty hilarious -- so it doesn't surprise me one bit to see Larry David take the starring role in Allen's latest, a quick-looking New York comedy called Whatever Works. Going only by the trailer, it looks to be an enjoyably typical (if appreciably old-school) Woody Allen comedy, but (as usual) the prolific filmmaker has managed to bring together one hell of a fun ensemble.

Joining Larry David are Patricia Clarkson, Ed Begley Jr., Evan Rachel Wood, and Conleth Hill in this story of an upper-class New Yorker who has some sort of mid-life crisis and decides to live like a starving artist. (If I have the synopsis right, then this flick sounds a little like Mel Brooks' Life Stinks, and no movie wants to sound like that.) But the trailer (available right here at Apple) made me chuckle more than once, and I'm certainly interested in seeing a cast like this deliver some of Woody Allen's neuroses. Too early to tell, of course, but Whatever Works looks like it could be a return to comedic form for Woody. (Because I think his last several comedies have been pretty weak.)

And you? Still a Woody Allen fan? Interested in the new one? It comes out on June 19.

I just came across the new poster for Whatever Works on IMP Awards (check it by clicking the image below), and beyond the too-perfect Larry David pose, I'm struck by the utter lack of Woody Allen on the thing. Beyond the billing block and maybe an especially sharp sense of font, how would anyone know that this was the latest film from the guy who made Annie Hall and Manhattan?

It was the same thing with Vicky Cristina Barcelona, and I'm wondering if potentially interested people would find themselves turned off upon finding out just whose movie they've been lured into. It's the same sense of un-branding (non-branding? anti-branding?) that kept most passersby from realizing that Zack and Miri Make a Porno was a Kevin Smith joint, and really, if you're already past that title, is his presence in the trailers and posters going to keep you away?

If anything, might the name recognition lure a couple of more people to either film (not that Larry David fans probably aren't already fans of Woody Allen, and not that Kevin Smith films probably already know which new movie is his)? Have you ever been sold on a movie until you got a glimpse of the name at the helm? When? Where? Why?

The Tribeca Film Festival kicks off tonight with a few changes from years past. The schedule is a little leaner and tighter, and Sundance veteran Geoffrey Gilmore has just arrived at the fest's parent company, Tribeca Enterprises. Having just launched in 2002, the festival is still finding its identity. Good thing we're here to help it look! Cinematical's Erik Davis and yours truly will be covering the festival over the next week. In the meantime, here are seven films we're looking forward to.

Whatever Works
Woody Allen's latest comedy is exciting for two reasons. For one thing, it marks his return to New York after setting his last four films in Europe. For another thing, it stars Larry David, whose famed neurotic pessimism makes him a perfect match for Allen's style. This is Tribeca's opening-night film, accompanied by much ballyhoo and fanfare -- but for some reason, we lowly members of the press aren't able to attend. Our badges get us into most public screenings, but not this one. So, um, we're looking forward to it, and that's all we'll be able to do: look forward to it. It's the kind of situation Larry David would complain about before finding some way to make it worse for himself.

Just when you thought American Apparel couldn't get any sleazier, founder Dov Charney and his legal team have managed to set a new low. You might remember that back in 2007, the hipster clothing outlet put up a billboard featuring an image of Woody Allen in full Hasidic gear from his 1977 film Annie Hall. Remember that brilliant piece of marketing? Well, turns out nobody bothered to ask the man, and before you knew it, he was on the horn with his lawyers to launch a $10 million lawsuit against the company for the unauthorized usage of his image -- Allen even went so far as to call the brand, "sleazy", "adolescent" and "infantile". But it looks like things are going to get even uglier, because legal representation for American Apparel have announced that on May 18th in a Manhattan district court, they will rake over every salacious detail of Allen's personal life in an attempt to prove that Allen's image isn't worth much to begin with.

According to AA's lawyer, "I think Woody Allen overestimates the value of his image. Certainly, our belief is that after the various sex scandals that Woody Allen has been associated with, corporate America's desire to have Woody Allen endorse their product is not what he may believe it is." Now I might be a little biased on this one because I am a big fan of Mr. Allen's work, but dragging up old accusations of child molestation and details from his messy divorce seems shady even by Charney's standards. AA's lawyers have already requested documentation regarding 'sex scandals' and custody hearings (which Allen has refused to provide), and if Charney and his lawyer get their way, they will have turned a simple case of copyright infringement into a full-blown personal attack.

Do you think AA has a point? Is Allen's personal life fair game? Or is this just an attempt to avoid a $10 million payout by embarrassing the man? Sound off below...

For a 70+ year-old man, Woody Allen knows how to reinvent himself and keep us on our toes. These last few years, he's really upped the ante as he broke out of New York -- tennis, journalism, brotherly intrigue, and vacation romance. But while he might have gone back to Manhattan and back to his beloved May-December theme with Whatever Works, this is not a slip back into a New York state of mind. Word hit last month that Allen's next project would be an ensemble piece, with Josh Brolin and Anthony Hopkins leading the cast. And now his next London-based project is getting even better.

The Hollywood Reporter posts that Nicole Kidman has signed onto the cast, which also now boasts an international array of drool-worthy actors -- Antonio Banderas, Freida Pinto, and Naomi Watts. THR points out that this mixes Spain, India, Britain/Australia, Austrailia, Britain, and USA. While an international cast is notable, I wonder if this is some hint towards the theme of this yet-untitled, plot-under-wraps project.

Then again, Woody likes to keep us guessing, so anything is possible. I just hope it has the same sort of bright whimsy as Vicky Cristina Barcelona. Production kicks into gear this summer, so we should hear more then.

Imagine if Zack Snyder wasn't the director behind the long-awaited big-screen adaptation of Watchmen, and Warner Bros. instead decided to go with someone like ... Woody Allen. Slate put together a pretty hilarious slideshow of what they think Watchmen would've looked like had the property been placed in someone else's hands. For example, as a Quentin Tarantino movie (see above), Slate notes: "As Jackie Brown was a tribute to '70s blaxploitation, Kill Bill was a tribute to '70s kung fu, and Death Proof was a tribute to '70s grindhouse, so Quentin Tarantino makes Watchmen a tribute to the fourth in his canon of formative aesthetic influences: '70s Hanna-Barbera cartoons."

Other directors with re-imagined Watchmen films included on Slate's list are Judd Apatow, Woody Allen, Sophia Coppola and Tyler Perry (their image of Rorschach as Madea made me do a serious LOL). And in case you're wondering, these fantastic images (a couple of which we highlighted below) come from Ashley Quigg. All kidding aside, though, something like this does make you think. I mean, what would a Watchmen film look like in someone else's hands? Did Zack Snyder do the comic justice, or is there another director who would've delivered a better product.

Check out a couple of Slate's images below, then definitely skip on over to their slideshow ... it's hysterical.



Follow me on Twitter