Anyone who loves the work of Woody Allen will appreciate this book. The photography is gorgeous, with behind-the-scenes shots as well as stills from the films. In addition, Woody comments on the making of the films.

I have to say that I haven't read any book that gets to the heart of Woody Allen's movies like this one does. Each of his films is analyzed and the different philosophical issues that are tackled in each film are discussed. This book will open your mind up to the whole world of philosophy and the struggle with how we should live that is at the heart of Woody's films. I not only learned a lot about these films so that I can appreciate them even more(which I didn't think was possible considering how much I liked them before this book)but I also learned a lot about philosophy and life. I cannot highly enough recommend this book. I wish I could give it twenty stars!

I can't believe that this book is not reveiwed. As a big band trumpet player for twenty five years it provided insight into not just Woody Herman,but the musicians that played on his band . That's what this book is really about. The life of being on the road with a big band. I could relate as I've been their and if you read this book you can live it to. The book is written by the alumni of the band as a kind of tribute to the man who created the band that played the blues. Its' more anecdotes then a actual biography.

To tell the truth, I wasn't expecting much when I first picked up this book. I'm a Woody fan but I thought the encyclopedic format (topics are alphabetized as in an encyclopedia) would be too superficial or unfocused. However, once I started I couldn't put it down. Actually, I did put it down because I have a busy life. But that's why this book was perfect for me. I could read it in "airtight components." I could read a section, get my fill, put it down, and come back to it an hour or day later and dive right in again. I learned a lot about Woody, his movies, major themes, the people he's worked with -- and, most importantly, life in general. I'm particularly interested in the Woodman's ideas about love and relationships (yes, I need the eggs). This book allowed me to review a lot of his movies fast in an overview type of way and discern some of his patterns. In fact, I think rereading it in this way will yield newer and deeper insights each time because the author, a professor, writes with great depth and insight (yet in a very readable and economic style). Although, as I said, I'm a Woody fan I have to admit that there were a number of his works I either didn't understand or didn't even know about. This book gave me an appreciation to see movies I had dismissed for one reason or another. If you're a Woody fan this is a great book to have. In many ways, it transcends Woody by putting his work in the context of modern thought and art. But it's still a great Woody book and one that any thinking fan is going to enjoy.

The author weaves a full thematic description of each Woody Allen's movie, with information on shooting locations and casts, along with movie costs and box office receipts in both the US and abroad. This book presents the most informative and interesting story of Woody Allen- genius American/New York filmmaker- I have ever read. The book was first published in Great Britain in 1996. David Rosenblatt Auburn University Archives Auburn, Alabama DROSENBL@LIB.AUBURN.EDU

Over all this movie is well worth watching,but sad to say I saw Annie Hall before this movie and had high expectaions, not to say there wasnt funny moments in this movie, My favorite was where Allen was dreaming about kissing Diane keatons character and her yelling I'm a married woman, RAPE.... don't ask me why it was funny but it made me laugh. Another funny moment was when Allen(woody) was on a first date with a sex addicted woman and when allen jumps on her (after she's explained that people should have sex as often a possible) pushes him off and says "what do you take me for?"accually writing this review made me reconsiter ill give this one a 4

When you say "Woody Allen Movie" some break into spontaneous laughter and others make a mad rush for the exit. This film, which stars and was written, but not directed by Allen, should please even those who are the least interested in his comedy - if the combination of slapstick and wry wit don't make you laugh in this one, he never will. Allen plays a San Francisco film critic who breaks up with his wife and returns to the dating circuit with helpful advice from a phantom Humphrey Bogart - uncannily played by Jerry Lacy. Tony Roberts as Allen's best friend keeps up a hilarious running gag as a business exec. in perpetual touch with his office by phone. Fixing Allen up is no small task. Roberts explains, "You've invested your emotions in a losing stock" to which Allen replies, "Who are you going to fix me up with General Motors?" Roberts wife, played by Diane Keaton isn't very optimistic either, "I don't know if any of my friends are your type, I mean most of them are fairly normal." This often overlooked film is nearly as inventive as Annie Hall and just as funny. The scene in which Allen tries to be smooth and prep his apartment for a date is a riot. Even the phony Bogart gets off some good lines such as, "Will you relax! you're as nervous as Elizabeth Scott before I blew her brains out." This is a wonderful comedic treasure, don't miss it.

A charming, early (1972) Woody Allen film which I've enjoyed numerous times. The comedy is always clever. Most memorable moments include a nymphomaniac telling Allen how she likes to enjoy sex with anyone, as often as possible yet when he makes an advance she is mortally offended asking 'What do you take me for?' and Allen giving Keaton a plastic skunk for her birthday. 'I remembered your birthday because it was the same day my mother had her hysterectomy.' he tells her. Diane Keaton is gorgeous in this film, even more so than in 'Annie Hall' and Tony Roberts is well cast as her workaholic husband. Don't miss it Allen fans!!

Annie Hall completely amazed me with its quick wit, humorous anecdotes
and its message. I felt it was great film in the way it presented Annie and Alvy as a mismatched, but lovable couple. I thought that Woody Allen
accomplished this by his innovative use of narrative. He broke the
standards in order to bring me closer to both main characters.

One technique, which I noticed from the start of the film, was
that Allen spoke directly to the camera. This made me feel that he was
directly speaking to me; I became a part of the conversation. Another
scene which I particularly liked was when he brought Marshall McLuhan
from behind the poster stand to insult the Columbia professor. I was
thinking that this would be the ideal situation. I oftentimes get into
arguments which I can't win, even though I am positively in the right. I was able to identify with Alvy's frustration simply because he looked at me and said,"Boy, if life were only like this". And I responded right back,"You're right".

I was also in conflict as to who I was suppose to like better. I
think that I was more sympathetic toward Annie because Allen
consistently showed me Alvy's hypocritical mannerisms and continual
attempts at controlling her life. For instance, when Alvy criticizes Annie's adult education, the screen cuts to a previous scene where Alvy praises adult education. I began to resent Alvy's lack of understanding and bigotry.

Also, I realized that the title of the film was Annie Hall. Thus,
the focus was on Annie through Alvy's eyes. At the end of the film, Alvy
and Annie are shown from a distance. As they say goodbye to one
another, flashbacks of their relationship are shown. Also, there is
background music: Annie sings "Seems like Old Times". The last person in
the film is Alvy. The last voice in the film is Annie. I became more linked to Annie because of the musical playback. It was quite amazing.

*Annie Hall* is a movie that a critic could love. Its hero, Alvy Singer (Allen), though apparently a professional comedian, is really more of a 24-hour, 7-days-a-week critic of everything he encounters: the Seventies drug culture, pretentious loudmouths, Los Angeles, WASPs from the Midwest, anti-Semites, Bob Dylan, aging hippies, and -- most important for getting on film critics' good side -- himself. (The constant cinematic references, such as *Snow White*, Fellini, Bergman, *The Sorrow and the Pity*, et al., also endear Allen to the critics . . . and to the overall movie-lover, as well.) In and around all this, the film tells the story of a mismatched relationship between neurotic, intellectual New Yorker Alvy and Wisconsin transplant Annie Hall (Diane Keaton, in an excellent performance). The details of the relationship are delineated with aching realism: the tentative getting-to-know-you stage, the petulant break-ups, the warm making-ups, the mundanities (like getting rid of spiders in bathtubs), the arguments, the hilarious private moments that can't be repeated with anyone else (like their attempt to cook some lobsters), the boredom, and finally the wearing-out of the whole thing. This is all superbly done . . . but even better are Allen's incessant, razor-sharp wisecracks that put the America of 1977 firmly in its self-obsessed place. For instance, his take on the Studio 54 culture that was happening in New York is summed up in a sneeze . . . that blows thousands of dollars of cocaine airily away. The West Coast nonsense is perhaps best captured in the snapshot scene of Jeff Goldblum on the phone: "I forgot my mantra." And Allen's jokes about turning right at a red light in California, and masturbation being sex with someone he loves, have permanently entered our language. Instead of dating the film, these observations make it more of a humorous time-capsule full of the detritus of a silly era. The restlessly inventive narrative structure that uses split-screen, flashbacks, scenes that have one character as both child and adult at the same time, even animation, is gravy on your mashed potatoes.

Remember when Woody Allen made good films? Well, you can't find a better example of his cinematic genius than in Annie Hall. The movie is full of biting satire and Allen's trademark witicisms. Nothing is sacred, relationships, religions, minorities, drugs, actors, singers, Hollywood, New York, books, and the plastic 70's are ripped apart by the endearing comedic razor in Allen's nervous mind. Allen uses some clever film techniques to move the movie beyond the conventional comedic-love story and into the realm of the classic. Along with Allen, Diane Keaton delivers a great performance. The short minute that Christopher Walken graces the screen is very enjoyable, to say the least. In the middle of the comedy, Allen manages to create a very believable and sweet romance, between him and Keaton.

Allen's best movie, in my humble opinion.

Woody Allen's dystopian sci-fi adventure, "Sleeper" is an amusing film filled with experimental elements. The comedy ranges from over the top sight gags (canoe sized bananas for one), to Allen's typical neurotic ravings, to Allen performing some "Blanch Dubois" dialog during a hilarious reenactment of a "typical" Jewish dinner scene performed in the middle of the woods.

The movie is very silly, and is more an anthology of short Allen-esk gags (visual and verbal) knitted together by the story of a man frozen in 1973 and awakened 200 years in the future to find the United States replaced by a police state. He meets a woman with a Ph.D in oral sex (Diane Keaton), and funny things happen during their "struggle for freedom".

Bottom line: If you like Woody Allen, and enjoy his brand of humor, you will enjoy this film. While retaining the elements that make Allen's films unique, the sci-fi / futuristic setting of "Sleeper" makes it a refreshing change of pace from Allen's other works.

The DVD itself leaves a lot to be desired, as do most DVD's produced for older films. The only "extras" on the disk are the theatrical trailer for the film. The menus and scene selection screens are static (no motion or animated transitions). The only interesting component to the menu is an unusually long piece of soundtrack that plays while the main menu is displayed. A surprising omission is the absence of English subtitles, which come in surprisingly handy when dialogue is obscured by sound effects, too many people talking at once, etc.

The DVD transfer itself is quite good. There is very little dirt on the film, and the overall picture quality is quite good.

Movie
----------------
Originality: B+
Creativity: A
Complexity/Depth: C-
Relevance/Message: C-
Artistic Merit: B-
Overall Entertainment Value: B+

DVD
------
Transfer Quality: A
Extras: D-
Use of Medium: C-

Woody Allen pulls out all the comic stops here, utilizing everything from Orwellian social satire, sci-fi movie parody, Harold Lloyd-style pratfalls,and a scene involving giant fruits and vegetables that has to be the funniest sight gag ever committed to celluoid. The one or two minutes of screen time involving the "Orgasmatron" alone is funnier than all the gags combined in any entire Farrelley brothers or Jim Carrey movie you'd care to name. By the way, am I the only person who noticed that the 1993 Sylvester Stallone film "Demolition Man" ripped off at least a half dozen comic premises directly from "Sleeper"? Granted, the "Rip Van Winkle" concept wasn't invented by Allen,but still...the gag about junk food being considered health food in the future--(just for starters) that's too specific to be coincidence! Oh well,there hasn't been an original thought in Hollywood since the mid-70's anyway- so why should we lose sleep, eh? Don't miss this 'sleeper'!

I'm normally not a futuristic, sci-fi fan, so I was a little reclutant to see this DVD version. I was sure it would be yet another film ripping off earlier films' special effects, as so many sci-fi films do today. Boy, was I wrong with this certain dvd version! It's a little hard to believe that this film was made in 1973. It possesses orginality, creativity, and the simple ability to make you laugh. A few of my main favorite scenes are the "Orgasmatron", which really had me laughing! The one when Keaton's character, Luna, coerces Allen's character, Miles, into this spacesuit-like costume and pulls the cord that blows it up and has Allen flying around--many people might not like this certain scene, because it doesn't require Allen's verbal wit-- but it was incredibly funny because he looked so ridiculous. I especially love the scene when Miles thinks he's Blanche Dubois and Luna has to become Stanley Kowalski in order to gently steer him back to reality. Allen was good as Vivien Leigh's Blanche, but Keaton was really wonderful as Marlon Brando's Stanley. This is an especially esoteric movie, because some people may not realize that one of Allen's goals for this movie was to satirize everything in the 1970's, including essential politicians. (Check out one of the earliest scenes, when Miles explains people that were important in the 1970's, such as Reagan and Nixon. This is one of the reasons why I like this movie so much. I don't have any complaints with this movie. Although, I did wonder whether Miles would choose to stay in the future with Luna, or have himself crygonically preserved again in the hopes that he'll wake up in another era that he actually likes. On a more materialistic note, I can't get over how young Allen looks in this movie! He actually looks good. And I can't believe how beautiful Keaton is! They really worked well together in this movie. I highly recommend this DVD version~don't miss it!

Without Feathers is good vintage Woody Allen writing. Interestingly, the breadth of essays contained in this book are a lot like his movies... there are great ones, there are good ones, and there are bad ones. I would say that this classifies the 18 different essays contained within this book to a tee with most of them landing in the "good" category. I've read all of his books, and I would say the most classic Woody Allen essay's are in Getting Even. I would recommend that anyone interested in reading a Allen book go there first, and then come to this one if they like it (plus it is in chronological order that way).

Perhaps the best thing about this book was not the essays but rather the two plays that were contained within. The play Death is hilarious, and ultimately was made into one of Woody Allen's films. This play gives an insight into how he writes primarily dialogue and very little description. Additionally, the play God was also very funny. The purchase is worth it to see the contrast between how Allen writes essays versus how he writes screenplays. The essays were good (not all that laugh out loud funny), but the plays were excellent.

Comedy legend Buster Keaton was hilarious because he had mastered the art of deadpan. His face was set in a permanently sad expression, which only made his antics and predicaments all the funnier. He never let on that he was being funny; and that makes the audience laugh all the harder.

Imagine being able to create the same effect in the written word. Woody Allen has been able to do precisely that. He never lets the reader know that the punch line is coming, so it hits the funny bone with full force. His book Without Feathers should never be read in polite company, since it causes the reader to break into hysterical peals of laughter that cannot be stopped.

I was rendered helpless while reading his material: "Do I believe in God? I did until Mother's accident. She fell on some meat loaf, and it penetrated her spleen. She lay in a coma for months, unable to do anything but sing "Granada" to an imaginary herring. Why was this woman in the prime of life so afflicted - because in her youth she dared to defy convention and got married with a brown paper bag on her head? And how can I believe in God when just last week I got my tongue caught in the roller of an electric typewriter? I am plagued by doubts. What if everything is an illusion and nothing exists? In that case, I definitely overpaid for my carpet. If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name at a Swiss bank."

Without Feathers was a bestseller in the early seventies, but it is about time a younger audience learns of this book. Don't miss the short stories of "The Whore of Mensa" and "If the Impressionists Had Been Dentists". And for heaven's sake, try not to eat or drink while you read it, or you will be laughing substances out of your nose.

This is one of the most hilarious, actually, the most hilarious book I have ever read. I don't know how he does it, but the combination of entirely random situation with common cliches makes even the most worn out ideas and themes hilarious.
Mr. Allen takes some of the biggest questions in human existence, "What happens to us when we die?" and "Is there a God?" and makes them into plays that are so incredibly disjointed and out of the common literary form that I almost couldn't follow them. Its such a relief after Shakespeare, where everything goes in the exact same pattern (gimme a break, I'm in high school)! Instead of having to read between the lines to pick up sarcasm, you have to look to pick up the plot of the play! It might be annoying to some people, but once you do figure out what "the Writer" is trying to say, it's a great feeling. Almost as good as knowing that there IS someone on this earth who is stranger than you. But then, we're not all as funny as Mr. Allen is either.
And it truly is his ramblings, not his spoof of big, deep, messages, that will make you fall out of your chair laughing. The friends I have shown this book ( I had to! They all seem to give me incredibly strange looks when I'm sitting at a pep rally and laughing hysterically after someone gets hurt) have tried to steal it after reading the first paragraph.
And what is almost the best thing is, is that he gives you a break. (in exception to the plays, which can get tedious at times) he skips around from idea to idea so quickly that it takes you by surprise, especially when he goes from trying to convince you that Shakespeare was someone else, who was someone else, who was someone else, to analyzing great impressionist art in the form of dentistry. Oops, I hope I haven't given away too much.
It fits perfectly into the spare minutes you have everyday and you an skip around, and read it however you like, and no matter what you do, it will still be funny. Now I have to go run and give it to the first person who tried to steal it from me.

Why do I choose to waste these few minutes of my life talking about a movie that few people have ever seen and that fewer still want to resurrect? If you mention a "Woody Allen Film" these days, you're bound to elicit one of a few choice conditioned responses - anything from, "Oh, I like his movies, especially the early, funny ones" or "Is he still making films?"

The fact is that Woody Allen is one of the great filmmakers to grace the American cinema. Granted, his films today have lost some of their public lustre due to the travails of his personal life and the unbearable political incorrectness of being Woody. Yet fifty years from now, he will be spoken of without hesitation or apology with names such as Kubrick, Ford, Keaton, Spielberg or Malick as one of the greats. Some critics realized this more than twenty years ago and have conveniently forgotten it.

But "Stardust Memories", if he never made another film, would insure his place among filmmaking elite. The movie in its time was castigated by critics because it presciently observed them as the high priests of a society which worships culture above art. Culture, of course, changes with the seasons but art is that constant which connects us to each other and the world throughout those changes. Further, it's release coincided with the death of John Lennon. The scene where Sandy Bates is shot by a crazed fan was uncomfortably closer to reality than the comic moment it wished to establish. Great movie, but it's release date just wasn't -- ahem! -- in the stars.

"Stardust Memories" is as close to perfect a film as I have ever seen. It borrows the structural approach to its story from Fellini's "8 1/2" but is so true to its own purpose it never seems derivative. It complements the sublime black and white cinematography of Gordon Willis with the patience of a camera that is not afraid to allow subjects to walk in and out of the frame. The camera never feels compelled to chase its subject, nor does the director attempt to artificially superimpose the action of the camera against the actions of the characters. Only in a brief series of jump cuts as we witness Charlotte Rampling telling "us" about her breakdown, do we have "technique" rising above a point of sublimation. And even then the erratic cuts perfectly mirror the emotional instability of the subject. And while I'm on the subject of perfection, the production design of Mel Bourne creates a weekend movie retreat which connects us with a recognition of a lost world we perhaps never knew we'd lost. The splendor of an elegant resort hotel along a 1950's Jersey boardwalk seems in the present day a wistful retreat -- a bit dingy if not slightly tawdry -- a symbol of a promised world once imagined but never quite realized.

But every bit equal to the power of the visuals is Allen's remarkable talent for matching period music to sustain mood. Yet I do not wish to speak of the music as the MUZAK. The music here is not used simply to sustain a mood as much as it uses its power to transform the audience into one who lives, for the moment, within the frame. Is there any music with greater power to transmogrify than Django Rinehart's guitar or Louis Armstrong's own version of "Stardust," which, in the end, shows us that the whole meaning of existence, for which some people search their whole lives, can be glimpsed in a single, ephemeral flicker of a moment.

For those who travel in darkness, even the briefest glimmer of stars leaves the memory of the unlighted path.

"Stardust Memories" sheds for us that kind of light.

Definitely one of his best. Personally I think it was originally panned because it was sort of proactively mocking its critics, due to the seemingly autobiographical slant of it. Woody Allen always insists his films are not autobiographical, though he does write what he knows. Here's a somewhat slow, very European movie from an American master of comedy, about a director known for his comedies, who's being panned because his latest movies are dark and European and not funny. It's as if Allen were making a movie about what was going to happen when said movie was released, which I don't think is intentional. But taken as intentional it would really **** off a pompous critic.

It's really brilliant, and just beautiful to watch being in Black and White. And- it is funny. Allen says in an interview with Stig Bjorkman that Stardust Memories is the closest he's ever come to exactly what he wanted to accomplish.

Couldn't agree more- this is one of his best. Personally I think it was originally panned because it was sort of proactively mocking its critics, due to the seemingly autobiographical slant of it. Woody Allen always insists his films are not autobiographical, though he does write what he knows. Here's a somewhat slow, very European movie from an American master of comedy, about a director known for his comedies, who's being panned because his latest movies are dark and European and not funny. It's as if Allen were making a movie about what was going to happen when said movie was released, which I don't think is intentional. But taken as intentional it would really **** off a pompous critic.

It's really brilliant, and just beautiful to watch being in Black and White. And- it is funny. Allen says in an interview with Stig Bjorkman that Stardust Memories is the closest he's ever come to exactly what he wanted to accomplish.