catalogue first draft

Catalogue draft

Films :

• Midnight in Paris(2011)Directed by Woody Allen[Film].France: Sony Pictures Classics.
  One of the reasons I chose this as my focus film is because it’s one of the newly released films of Woody Allen. By analyzing it, I can prove not only that Woody has a unique style qualifying him as an auteur, but also that he is still relevant and should be appreciated. This film combines his most classic filming and scripting techniques which can be identified in his earlier work. These techniques have not only made him famous but his movies too; they are highly ranked by many respected critics. His new surprising and exciting  methods prove he has not run out of ideas, but he is still original and devoted to film making.  
• Manhattan (1979) Directed by Woody Allen [Film]. USA: United Artists.
  I also chose this film by Woody Allen as this is one of his earliest films  and can show his style at the beginning of his career compared to the present. The similarities between show he has been consistent with his work. One of these similarities is the presence of the main ‘Woody Character’ which people believe is the reflection of the director’s personality, another example of being an auteur. This film is also one of his pieces of work according to film critics, showing that he has kept this formula consistent in order to create quality movies not due to the lack of creativity.
• To Rome with Love (2012) Directed by Woody Allen [Film]. Italy: Medusa Distribuzione.
  The reason I chose this film is because this is also a more recent film by Woody Allen. In this case the film has not been received as well and has been described as one of the worst Allen films. By comparing it to the other two films I have chosen, it does share some of the similarities which shows these formulas he follows do not mean success. This film can example he might not be the extremely talented director everybody claims he is, but there are also many more films that did not disappoint. An argument can be created that he is a good director, maybe even a true auteur but even he does not create the best product sometimes.

 

Other sources:

Abrams, S. (2014) Simply do it: Talking with Woody Allen about directorial style | interviews. Available at: http://www.rogerebert.com/interviews/simply-do-it-talking-with-woody-allen-about-directorial-style (Accessed: 6 October 2016).

This article is one of two I have found with quotes straight from Woody Allen about his process of film mind and his directorial style. He mentions he never studied anything before jumping into this career and was never bothered about it. Instead he mentions he used his instinct and his gut feeling which has been rewarding so far. This suggests he has a natural talent when it comes to turning an idea on paper into a product on screen. Also the interviewer himself compared many of the movies through different micro techniques that can be identified and tried to understand the ones Allen tends to prefer shooting a film. All of the answers helps me build a list of the most predictable methods Woody would use and therefore further analyse Midnight in Paris in order to help my research.

Bell, J. and Stevens, B. (2011) ‘Woody Allen in the 21st century’, Sight&Sound (April), pp. 16–20.

This article was extremely useful to my research as it is relatively new and it goes through the main arguments I have encountered as I investigated the subject. The author discusses whether Allen’s repeated use of certain elements makes his films predictable and boring or if his style is so good that it makes them better. There is also an interview which again is a very reliable source of information. There are multiple authors for this article as well which indicates this opinion is not singular but a common one.

Björkman, S. (1993) Woody Allen on Woody Allen: In conversation with Stig Björkman. London: Faber and Faber Ltd.

 This book was a good source as it is also one of the only ones with quotes straight from Woody Allen himself, which makes the information given the most valid and reliable. Also this is part of a long book series with Stig Bjorkman who is a very good film critic. As the book was published in 1993, there is only an interview for Manhattan and none of my other chosen films. In the interview Allen talks about how he came to the fundamental ideas for this film and how even though they sounded crazy or weird he used them anyway. This shows that he was looking for something new and common to excite audiences but he still kept his other characteristics.

Burr, T. (2016) Here’s why Woody Allen is overrated. Available at: https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/movies/2016/07/14/here-why-woody-allen-overrated/eCrIsQuae9thQJd6MWj7bL/story.html (Accessed: 6 October 2016).         

I chose this item because it explains why Woody Allen might not be as talented as he is seen and actually not an auteur at all. This article makes many good arguments backed up by examples which prove that he does not make good movies all the time and in fact he might just be using the same ideas in different context and getting  lucky. He also mentions To Rome with Love as one of the worst film Woody  has made.

Ebert, R. (2011) Midnight in Paris Review. Available at: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/midnight-in-paris-2011 (Accessed: 5 October 2016).

This review was very important as it was a positive article overall and it also came form a very reliable source; Roger Ebert is a very well known and appreciated film critic. He not only compliments the film immensely but also mentions some of the things he has observed as familiar in the film such as the neoralistic theme and the presence of the main ‘Woody character’.

 

Ebert, R. (2012) To Rome with Love Movie review. Available at: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/to-rome-with-love-2012 (Accessed: 6 October 2016).

 This is also a review from Roger Ebert, but for this film he uses a more negative tone. He does not think this movie is as good as he would have expected a Woody Allen film to be. This not only shows that he has a reputation for good films, but also that there is no bias in this writing. This bad review also supports the reason I chose To Rome with Love as one of my films; Allen might not be the talented director is made to be by many articles, he might just get lucky. On the other hand the article doesn’t completely regard the film as horrible as there are certain parts which were good, but didn’t save the whole film in the end.

Heath, G. (2011) Cannes film festival 2011: Midnight in Paris, Bellflower, & sleeping beauty | the house next door. Available at: http://www.slantmagazine.com/house/article/cannes-film-festival-2011-day-one-midnight-in-paris-bellflower-sleeping-beauty (Accessed: 6 October 2016).

This film review is quite short but it includes quite a lot of opinions on the film and also how it was received at the Cannes festival that year. This festival is a very famous and highly regarded event which makes it important that it was liked and appreciated. Also Woody Allen quite often premiers his films here instead of Hollywood as he knows they not might be for everybody, only film makers and experts can fairly analyze his work.it also points to the fact that he is not making films for money and fame but to express his ideas and inspire other young film enthusiasts.

How to make a movie like Woody Allen (2015) Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/irrational-man/make_woody_allen_movie/ (Accessed: 13 October 2016).

This article was very insightful as the author mentions what they believe to be the characteristics of all Woody Allen movies. This is very useful as I can use these to build a list of micro and macro elements and separate them into new and typical techniques of the director. Furthermore the author goes on to say these might be present in all of his movies, but they are still exciting and unpredictable in the end. They also praise the director himself, complimenting his hard work ethic and appreciating the effort he puts into all of his films. This shows that he is and has been very passionate about filmmaking as well as unique, all qualities of an auteur.

Kermode, M. and Mayo, S. (2011) Midnight in Paris reviewed by Mark Kermode. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mark+kermode+midnight+in+paris (Accessed: 2016).

This video source was very helpful as Mark Kermode himself mentions the similarities between Woody Allen’s movies Manhattan and Midnight in Paris, both films I have chosen. This backs up the idea that he has kept his style true. He also compliments both films, especially the new style that surfaces in the latest one; he remarks that the film starts in a very typical Woody Allen way but it surprises the audiences when it turns out to be new. Mark Kermode is also a very highly regarded film critics, who is known for being harsh but fair when analyzing a movie. This adds to the reliability of his opinion, making it trustworthy to use for my argument.

Newton, M. (2016) Woody Allen: Cinema’s great experimentalist. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/jan/13/woody-allen-michael-newton (Accessed: 6 October 2016).

I chose this source because it discusses Allen’s films as well as him as the man behind the scenes rather than him in his personal life. The opinion seems to be well backed up by reasons and objective. It was very useful as the article looks as his entire career to date, making points about many aspects of it over time. It also inspired my research as it mentioned many aspects of him I had not considered such as the fact He has inspired many people who have become good director’s. This shows he is a great example of a film maker. He is also called an experimentalist, which suggests he made his name by not sticking to the rules and trusting his instinct, quality of a true auteur.

Woody Allen - Awards (2014) in IMDB. Available at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000095/awards?ref_=nm_awd (Accessed: 2016).

This source was very useful as it listed all the nominations and awards won by Woody Allen. This was very useful as I made the observation that he has been nominated for hundreds of big awards such as Academy Awards and Golden Globes but has won only a very small amount of them. This supports my argument that people will compliment his work and his talent, as proved by the many nominations, but they will instead give the award to a more popular director or film, usually a blockbuster that is supported by a bigger production company.