Tag: Woody Allen

The Woody Allen Doc

In my fantasy Woody was me though nothing could be farther from the truth. I saw him woo Diane Keaton in Annie Hall and Mariel Hemmingway in Manhattan and thought he was pre-living my life.

First things first. I am surprised there is a documentary about Woody Allen on TV. I am surprised he agreed. I am glad I watched.

I probably first saw Woody when he was on TV in the sixties. He was one of many comics on TV. I knew him a little. It wasn’t until Sleeper that I was hooked!

Awkward Jew from New York City. Intellectual. We are both the former. I foolishly thought I was the latter too.

In my fantasies Woody was playing me. Nothing could be farther from the truth!

I saw him woo Diane Keaton in Annie Hall and Mariel Hemmingway in Manhattan and thought he was pre-living my life. These two movies are among the most romantic ever made.

When she was in her early teens I convinced Stef to watch Annie Hall with me. She really enjoyed it. We were both surprised by that.

I was scared to mention Manhattan to her because of the content.

Allen is not without flaws and controversy. On the PBS site for the documentary one commenter wrote:

I love the American Masters Series. However I am seriously disappointed that Woody Allen is a choice. He is a pedophile. I don’t know what makes him any different than Roman Polanski. Talented yes, but a creepy man.

This documentary filled in a lot of holes in understanding where he came from. It doesn’t give instructions to become him.

Part two airs tonight on PBS. Because it’s the 21st Century both parts will be repeated forever and streamed online.

Watch Interview with Robert Weide on PBS. See more from AMERICAN MASTERS.

Should I Care About Letterman? I Do

It was obvious the audience was also caught off guard. They didn’t seem to get the drift of what he was saying.

“I’m glad you folks are here tonight, and I’m glad you folks are in such a pleasant mood, because I have a story I’d like to tell you and the home viewers as well.” – David Letterman

letterman-ticket.jpgI rushed home and quickly turned on the TV. I wanted to watch David Letterman’s mea culpa. I am not proud this was must see TV.

A few quick notes. The Letterman extortion story exploded because of the Internet and social media. It wasn’t long after Letterman’s audience exited the Ed Sullivan Theater that the twittering began. Though Letterman was mum the accused perp’s name surfaced by 11:00p and his CBS News affiliation a few minutes later.

Social media led mainstream media by a mile. The Washington Post/CNN’s Howard Kurtz is a perfect example of the new pecking order.

“Weird: I tweeted, Anderson Cooper’s person saw it, seconds later I’m phoning in to CNN on the Letterman affair(s). Talk about Twitter power” – Howard Kurtz via Twitter

I’m a big Letterman fan and have been for nearly 30 years. I watched his confession tonight–that’s what it was.

I knew Dave was a flawed man, but this wasn’t a flaw I’d expected. My assumption was his shortcomings were beyond his control. This decidedly is not.

It was obvious the audience was caught off guard. There was no context so they originally felt Dave was setting up some bit. They didn’t get the drift of what he was saying. More than once there was awkward silence as they grasped to understand what was unfolding. They would have benefited by being pre-tweeted.

I wish I knew if tonight’s revelations would affect my ongoing viewing or even my opinion of Letterman in general. Though disappointing, these affairs of his aren’t at the Polanski level nor what suspect was Michael Jackson’s dysfunctional worst. I still enjoy Woody Allen movies and he’s been pretty skeevy as an adult.

I am conflicted. My opinion will certainly be swayed by the opinions of others.

Why should I care anyway? But I do.

Imus – Totally Off Topic

I watched the replay of Keith Olbermann’s show tonight when I got home from work. Not a particularly exciting news day. I had already seen or read nearly everything he reported.

While he was doing the Imus story, Keith made reference to “1,200 Hamburgers To Go,” Imus’ iconic comedy bit/album. And then Olbermann told the fiction normally associated with it – that it was a real call made on-the-air.

When this bit first aired, Imus worked at WGAR in Cleveland. After he left, I also worked there. All we shared in common was program director John Lund, who hired us both.

That McDonalds guy… it’s Lund! That’s what John told me nearly 35 years ago. I was asking about the bit, thinking at the time it had been a real call, when John told me the backstory.

I didn’t think about it until years later when I was watching Woody Allen’s Bananas. Siding with the rebels in a broken down Central American setting, Allen is sent to get lunch for the troops.

Do you have

any grilled cheese sandwiches?

– Yes, sir.

– Well, let me have a thousand.

And… tuna fish… and

bacon, lettuce and tomato sandwiches.

As far as I can tell, Imus’ album came out in 1972, a year after Allen’s movie. The scene’s are virtually the same.

The bit was funny. It just wasn’t original nor legitimate.

Keith Olbermann and I have corresponded in the past via email, but MSNBC has seen fit to ‘obscure’ his address. Since I can’t tell him, I’ll tell you.

Blogger’s adendum:

After I wrote this, John Lund wrote me. He was there, so his timeline is much better than mine. And, if writing now, I would no longer imply the connection between 1200 Hamburgers and Woody Allen’s Bananas.

Regarding 1200 Hamburgers to Go… We did all phony phone calls as setups because it was illegal to put people on the air without getting their permission first…and back then we had that telephone beep every 10 seconds when we recorded. While the LP was released when Don got to NY in 1972, we conceived and recorded it early in his tenure at 1220/WGAR, certainly by spring of 1971 if not the previous fall. As with many of the cuts on the album, I wrote the bits and was the voice on a few. I wrote comedy for Don for several years, including bits for his TV show on a UHF station in Cleveland (sponsored by Ed Stinn Chevy)…and bits like this. Typically he conceived the premise, I wrote the script or outline, we rehearsed, then he would call me in my office from the studio to record the routine. To sound like a McDonald’s employee for that call, I spoke with a pencil in my mouth.

Woody Allen Instead of New York

My dad didn’t feel well last night. He’s fine now… in fact he was fine by the time I woke up. But not well last night was reason enough not to go to New York City. We’ll try again Monday.

That left us with a full day to fill and not much to fill it with. Helaine suggested going to the movies – specifically Scoop, the latest from Woody Allen.

That in and of itself is pretty amazing, because Helaine feels there’s something inherently wrong with patronizing an auteur&#185 who sleeps with his former stepdaughter. Point well taken. It’s tough not to find that skeevy.

At one point I was enough of a Woody Allen fan that when I saw Love and Death and didn’t enjoy it, I returned the next night to find out what was wrong with me!

This movie was a somewhat predictable, mainly enjoyable, little film shot in London and the English countryside. A de-glamorized Scarlett Johansson was wickedly sexy.

I had to ask ‘who he’ about Hugh Jackman. Give me an “L” for loser on that.

The story begins with Johansson’s trip to the stage – an audience member called to be magician’s assistant for The Great Splendini (Woody Allen). While ‘inside’ the magic trick she meets the freshly dead newspaper reporter Joe Strombel (Ian McShane).

He’s looking for a reporter, but Scarlett’s a journalism student – close enough. She ends up the recipient of a huge story of murder and money. That’s the scoop in Scoop.

If that was all there was it would have been a cute little movie.

What upset me (and I’m using upset as opposed to bothered, because upset conveys deeper angst) was Allen playing his ‘standard’ character, now an older man… oh hell…now an old man.

I remember him with Janet Margolin in Take the Money and Run and with Diane Keaton in nearly everything else. He was nerdy, dweeby, unattractive, but always got the girl. In this movie, the only way he gets the attention of the ingenue is by assuming the role of her father!

Maybe I’m more concerned for me than Woody? There’s a tendency to use the lives of others as our own benchmarks. Even though he’s a good 15 years older than me, I somehow saw him as a contemporary.

All this aside, it was an afternoon well spent for my wife, mother, father, me and the one other person in the theater for the 3:40 PM showing.

&#185 – From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

The term auteur (French for author) is used to describe film directors (or, more rarely, producers or writers) who are considered to have a distinctive, recognizable vision, either because they repeatedly return to the same subject matter, or habitually address a particular psychological or moral theme, or employ a recurring style, or all of the above. In theory, an auteur’s films are identifiable regardless of their genre. The term was first applied in its cinematic sense in Fran

Hitch – The Movie

I took Helaine on a date this afternoon. The idea was a romantic movie… I know, 3:30 PM, how romantic could it be?

We headed down to North Haven to see “Hitch,” the new movie with Will Smith and Kevin James. More on that in a minute.

I wanted coffee, but I felt it would be uncool to bring a container of Dunkin’ Donuts coffee (my favorite) into the theater – plus, I had seen coffee there before.

Bzzzz. Wrong! No coffee.

Instead, I ended up paying $4 for a large Diet Pepsi. $4! A 2-liter bottle costs 99&#162.

I admit it. I am the fool here. I’m the one who paid the $4… and didn’t get my coffee to boot.

On the other hand, though movie tickets now cost $9.50, we got ours for $6. This is one of those strange, hidden benefits of being a AAA member. Yes, you have to buy them in advance, but they don’t go bad (or if they do, they do it slowly enough that it’s never been a problem).

The newspaper said the movie was scheduled to start at 3:30. Not quite. Between a few commercials, promos and coming attractions, it didn’t get starting until sometime after 3:45 PM.

Hitch is the story of Will Smith, a relationship counselor. He takes hapless schlemiels, like I was when I was single, and gives them the advice necessary to meet the woman of their dreams.

His clients are sweet and earnest, though not classic catches. He is principled – the unexpected attribute for someone in that line of work, and the pivotal element creating the emotional tension that carries the movie.

Ask me what Will Smith does for a living? He is charming for a living. Sure, he acts… but he’s always acting as Will Smith being charming. There is a very good living doing that – obviously. And, quite honestly, it is a role I enjoy seeing.

His main pupil through the film is Kevin James, an accountant in love with a beautiful heiress who is a client of his firm. He lives a life where they are physically near each other, but she never see him.

In this movie, Kevin James was my surprise. I know he’s a comedian, has a successful sitcom (which I’ve never watched), and does a pretty good Jackie Gleason. He was very good.

Kevin James strongest point, was he never overwhelmed the character he played. It was never over the top. This was a nice guy, a good guy, not a beautiful guy.

His restrained physical comedy combined with his timing and interplay with Will Smith are what made the movie for me.

Smith and James love interests, Eva Mendes and Amber Valletta, are pretty and appropriate, but it’s the two guys and New York City that carry the weight here. New York is an integral part of the story and I am glad to see it playing itself instead of seeing Toronto or Vancouver as some wimpy New York wannabe.

The city was portrayed with the same kind of loving charm that Woody Allen brought to Annie Hall and Manhattan.

Even at 4:30 in the afternoon, this was a great date movie. We both loved it. It will be huge at the box office.

Blogger’s note – This is entry 1,000 in my blog. It is a milestone I never thought about… never expected. Thanks again for stopping by to read my words and thoughts.

Schickel On Scorsese

Last month I watched a great documentary by Richard Schickel on the works of Woody Allen. Tonight it was my turn to see Schickel’s take on Martin Scorsese.

After an hour and a half of listening and watching I have to admit I am exhausted. The absolute breadth of Scorses’s work is what had me riveted. There was not a picture, not a clip, that didn’t hold my interest.

In some ways I am surprised because Scorsese often directs movies which depict incredible violence. This is not implied violence – it is up on the screen and it is gory and repulsive. Yet, within the context of his movies, this violence advances the story.

My own favorite Scorsese movie, one of many starring Robert DeNiro, is King of Comedy. Not only did the movie capture the craziness (and crazy people) who come along with celebrity, it also showed Jerry Lewis in a dramatic performance I would have never expected – never.

Lewis plays Johnny Carson… or at least a Carson clone, doing his show from Manhattan. He was totally believable. He was never Jerry Lewis. He was always in character.

Now Scorsese’s new film Aviator is out. I guess doing this interview was one way to promote the movie. Works for me. I’ll have to see it.

This is my second time recording a Richard Schickel interview. I know he’s the film critic for Time but this was new to me. As I mentioned after the first time, he is totally removed from these films. There are no off camera questions. No cutaways. The principal is the subject 100%.

Woody Allen

Now that I’ve had a DVR for a while, I can safely say I do use it. The ease, relative to a VCR, is certainly incentive to use it. There are some shows I tape every time they air – John Stewart, Boston Legal, Nova and 60 Minutes&#185. Other times I’ll see something that catches my eye and quickly hit the button to schedule a recording.

That’s how I got the Woody Allen documentary “A Life in Film” on Turner Classic Movies that I recorded this weekend and watched last night. The interview was conducted by Richard Schickel, film critic and historian.

The documentary is very simple with Allen sitting throughout. No other voices, no off camera questions, are heard. Clips from his films were used throughout to illustrate Woody’s points.

I have been a big Allen fan for… can this possibly be… over thirty years. I knew his work, but he was under my radar in the sixties. The same goes for What’s Up Tiger Lily and Casino Royale. I knew they were there but didn’t see them until much later.

It was Bananas that first attracted me and Sleeper which cinched the deal. From then on, I couldn’t get enough.

I remember going to see Love and Death in 1975. I went on opening night in Center City Philadelphia with my friend Harvey Holiday. Neither of us liked the movie, but we went back the next night to make sure. It was better the second night. The problem wasn’t Allen as much as it was me!

In last night’s documentary, Allen gave credit to Bob Hope for much of his physical persona in the earlier movies. The clips bore that out. But, though Woody Allen said he paled in comparison to Bob Hope, I’m not so sure.

What most interested me was the ability to hear Allen talk about his work… his art… in terms of an occupation. It was fascinating, because I think he analyzes and tears about everything he does, before, during and after.

Obviously, there has been controversy in Allen’s recent adult life. He is married to the adopted daughter of his former wife (see note below). It’s tough not to see characters like Mariel Hemingway in Manhattan and wonder if life imitates art.

There is just not enough of this type of show on television. I was glad I taped it and didn’t have to stay up through the middle of the night to see it air ‘live.’

&#185 – Recording 60 Minutes is a royal pain. Because the show follows football its start time is fluid, to say the least. I wish my DVR would be able to follow schedule changes and adjust accordingly. As long as they’re at it, I’d like to program it over the Internet as well.

Steve Martin on the Radio

As I left the house today, I turned on Talk of the Nation on NPR. It’s a show I listen to most days.

There seem to be two types of public radio – classical and other ‘non-mainstream’ music and non-confrontational talk (which separates it from Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and too many others to mention).

In this area, the ‘talking’ NPR is heard on two stations with very poor signals. One is on Long Island, far southeast of me. The other is very low powered though closer. I have buttons set for both and punch back and forth as the signals fade and distort.

On my way home from work I listen to BBC World Service news on these stations. Except for their Euro-centric sports coverage, I enjoy it and learn a lot about what’s going on in the world.

Back to this afternoon.

I turned on Talk of the Nation and heard a familiar voice speaking with the host, Neal Conan. I couldn’t place it. He was answering a question about how he describes himself and offered up his tax return (which he doesn’t personally prepare) probably says actor.

Who the heck was it?

The conversation continued and then I realized: Steve Martin. He was promoting the paperback release of his latest novella.

I find Steve Martin a very interesting person. His career has taken an unorthodox route to where it is now – yet at every point, I have found him incredibly entertaining. As he has gotten older (me too) I have found him to be intellectually interesting.

Today, on Talk of the Nation, Neal Conan played a few seconds of a cut from an earlier comedy album. I could feel Martin squirming in his seat – trying to get away from what was being played. It was the same when a caller asked when he would tour again. “Never.”

I understand how he feels. He is a different person from that “wild and crazy guy” He is not the banjo player who used to appear with an prank arrow through his head.

On the other hand, that is how we learned to like him. That is how we were originally attracted to his work. I know he’s changed. There’s no reason to run away from it.

A few years ago, in Las Vegas, we went to an exhibition of his art collection at the Bellagio Hotel. It didn’t take much to realize he’s well rounded and thoughtful.

I have seen a few of his movies. Helaine and I are both very big fans of “LA Story,” a movie which is to Los Angeles and Woody Allen’s Manhattan is to New York City. I guess after writing this, I should go out and get one of his novellas.

There’s one other part of Steve Martin that really impresses me, and I almost forgot to add it. Whenever he appears with Letterman, he prepares material. I’m not talking about re-hashing a stand-up routine, he writes absolutely fresh material. Sometimes it’s done live, sometimes it’s on tape, but it shows effort and a dedication to his craft. It’s always very funny – though that is secondary. I’m impressed with the effort, which shows a true respect for his audience and craft.

Today’s interview with Steve Martin is available on the Talk of the Nation website.