Spidersecu Don't Believe the Hype

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Michelle Ridley The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

sharky_55 Husband and Wives attempts to navigate the tricky territory surrounding two married couples in their middle ages, one of which has suddenly announced their separation. Farrow's Judy takes the Allen role here; she is almost offended at this sudden change in their within their comfort, projecting hard and yet unable to accept that this is an outcome that she wants for herself. Allen's camera departs from its usual fare, the serenity in the stillness, the roving, unbroken long takes that let the performances and script shine. It whips backs and forth with the jerkiness and blurred vision of an intruder of this intimate moment, as unbelieving as Judy herself, shocked by the revelation. The dialogue does not pause for a witty insight - it is overlapping, interrupting, reflecting the fragmentation of their relationships to come (and which has perhaps already begun long ago). Judy Davis is a marvel. She is the hit hard the most of the following events, despite how Farrow might act, because she is the one left initially alone, and her ex-husband has found a prettier and younger thing. And in just three weeks, no less; upon discovering this she whips up a fury that seems to charge the frames to rumble themselves. Davis is restless, trembling, a bundle of nervous energy openly and without inhibition. By contrast Jack seems to be having the time of his life, snuggling, teasing, kissing his new shiny partner, flaunting his rediscovery. Gabe predictably treats this as an intellectual sin: "You're IQ's gone into remission," he remarks. It is not like him. The interactions in Husbands and Wives are wonderful because they are full to the brim of bitter, distrusting adults that have grown weary of keeping up appearances over a lifetime. The navigation of the business of love and romance and dating in these middles ages is a contemptuous battleground, full of baggage, frustration and insecurity. Judy asks her husband is she wants someone new, and underlines the question strongly with connotations of her own desires, but would sooner explode at his wrong answer first. He answers correctly, and flips the question back to her, and the atmosphere is stagnant with their dual dissatisfaction. Davis can barely contain her misery even after a wonderful night, her voiced enjoyment undercut by a biting scorn at Mahler's sentimentalism or watery Alfredo sauce. The faux-documentary style is appropriate when we are witnessing characters and relationships exploding and releasing a storm of emotions, and yet at times it takes away from the moment. Aside from the hand-held there are also snippets of talking heads, snap zooms and injections of the snappy narrator's comments, but they feel like stealing ripe opportunities right from under our noses, moments of truth and vulnerability in-between the play-acting. Case in point: Judy has all but set up her dream date for Michael and Sally, and is swooning at his descriptions of the night out. The dramatic irony of the sudden rainstorm during their lunch is the universe openly mocking her chances. And yet the culmination of all this is Farrow merely voicing her envy to the camera. Why not follow her shuffling away to the other room, sitting down and breathing hard, letting the take linger until it becomes uncomfortable? Let Farrow act, let her display that tremendous and natural vulnerability within her.The editing is vicious, even more so than when it exposed Alvy Singer's hypocrisy in Annie Hall. It cuts deep down into the married couples instabilities, juxtaposing the fiery highs and the nostalgic lows into a flurry of realisation. He departs to follow a similar path as Jack, chasing after the metaphorical lost youth. Because it is a purely physical affair, he ignores the warning signs, the fictitious nature of her stormy and tempestuous personality. But surprisingly there is a reversal. She comes to fetishise his maturity and intellectualism, which is a dream come true for the Allen type, but he falters. There are thunderstorms, birthday wishes and candles, all set up for him, but he does not characteristically pounce. This is not a clumsy autobiographical element as many have proposed. Rain criticises (and rightfully, if you are familiar with the Allen type) the less savoury aspects of his novel, and initiates the moment. But he admits that "I don't want to hurt anyone. I don't want to get hurt.", and realises that it will not last. A romantic illusion, but a comfortable one for some.

popcorninhell Gabe (Woody Allen) and Judy (Mia Farrow) have invited their good friends Jack (Sydney Pollack) and Sally (Judy Davis) for a small dinner at their quaint Manhattan apartment. Their abode is full of books and knickknacks all pointing to a comfortable urbanite life in the largest city in the world. Then Jack and Sally reveal some surprising news…after years of seemingly happy marriage, the two have agreed to a separation and eventual divorce. After that bomb is dropped the two couples reexamine their relationships with each other, trying to find meaning in romances both current and past while discovering the good, the bad and the ugly in marriage.Woody Allen is mostly known for his comedies. But while Husbands and Wives has some pretty spot on observational humor, the story is largely somber and dramatic. Not dramatic in the sense of a Wednesday afternoon soap opera but a benign drama that with a few spikes of activity focuses mostly on the characters. There is no clever high concept or narrative liberties here like say, The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985); the film is more straight-laced and character driven along the lines of Interiors (1978) and Crimes and Misdemeanors (1989).And what of the characters or rather the actors who flesh them out? Judy Davis, Mia Farrow and Juliette Lewis are the obvious standouts, representing three very different women all of which are looking for the same thing; someone to love and someone to love them back. Davis received an Oscar nomination for her role as a bitter divorcée trying to come to terms with her ex-husband's infidelity and being single again. She's continually frustrated and confused by the yearnings of the heart occasionally even lashing out on her boyfriend Gates (Liam Neeson). She's cynical and wary of attachment yet deep down she knows that her entanglements with Jack aren't over.Mia Farrow is a stark counterpoint to Diane Keaton's brassy personalities of Allen's earlier work. Farrow's intensity lies always below the surface, providing the perked looks and mousiness of a young ingénue with the mind and body language of a veteran in the trials of love. It's a shame that out of the twelve Woody Allen films she has been in (for which Husbands and Wives was most famously her last) she had never received recognition by The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for her stellar work.Juliette Lewis who plays one of Gabe's young students from his Literature course, has the appearance and vulnerability of a dewy-eyed devotee. Yet when the amiable Gabe discovers he might be the object of desire here and Lewis's Rain the controller, he recoils. There's a scene where the two are in a cab discussing the latest draft of his book. Unable to take criticism, Gabe calls Rain a 20-year-old twit and says "I'd hate to be your boyfriend, he must go through hell." Rain cavalierly responds "Well, I'm worth it."Those who bemoan Allen's post-Annie Hall (1977) work won't find relief from his more meditative works of the 1980's. While most of the characters are likable they sometimes do unlikeable things, each on their own journey of discovery. I suppose we all do things we regret for love and those with a mature outlook on the subject matter will find a lot to enjoy and a lot to flinch at in Husbands and Wives. I suppose the heart wants what the heart wants.http://www.theyservepopcorninhell.blogspot.com

andrew_zito Apologetically Woody Allen and I went to the very same High school with a 15 year difference I must say another Woody Allen Celebration of the once great liberal Corporate capitalist society's middle class lifestyle and the objectification the human experiences of sex and living.Sorry I am not the biggest of fans though respectfully one can suppose they should be grateful for subject matter that would be better detailed in a book rather than in the shorthand form of popular film and cinema in what is not always relevant to everyone. Woody Allen films though of a interesting nature and good quality seemingly often presents a one sided view of what is essentially existential liberal and intellectual as if his life revolves around what exists in a Cocoon. These films are not Robert De Niro Raging Bull. Woody Allen perhaps Woody Allen closest to Dustin Hoffman in many ways is distinguished as even more insular where I would wish he broke out of his mold that is unique to him as a stylized artist who seems to have stopped expanding beyond what he has already done in his career.This title Husbands and Wives lives up to its title but it fails to expand beyond that subject matter 26 minutes into the film in its predictable formulaic nature which though thoughtful and provocative in that sense neither present entertainment nor any intellectual breakthrough in the sphere of the middle class life style.I want and demand significance and though this film is interesting but in that it fails to provide what "I want and demand significance" I am disappointed. This is not the three stooges nor peter Boyle. This is exclusively Woody Allen where I presume his productions are the products of his cloistered environment which means nothing to me except the world is pathetically mundane which would need to produce the dynamics of the working and under classes if there was no "working and under classes" that are sorely lacking in Woody Allen films.So 35 minutes into the film and I am still bored as the dynamics are insular subjective of a personal nature that seems to be lacking a social element similar in nature to Jane Austen but lacking the blunt social dynamics life is so full of.

jackasstrange I am a big fan of Woody Allen works, no surprise here. I even find some of his weakest efforts to be above average films. Husband and Wives is far from being one of his weakest efforts though, pretty like the opposite actually. It depiction of the people relationships is spot on here. Worth Noting that he clearly had a tendency to write about 'old man relationship with young girl' and relationships breaking up. Sounds like interesting subjects, being said I'm not a old man nor a young girl, but the dialogs and the characters make it feel so interesting, and above all, real, that's hard to not be interested at all. The separation thing is so true, and so surreal at same time…that is probably why it's so interesting. The metaphor is what is worthy, after all, so thumbs up.But anyway, Woody shows here a history about two couples: one of them going through a difficult time of separation, and the other pretending that are well, but very instable and weak, even weaker than the marriage of their friendly couple. And of course, there is always a lot of discussions (typical of Allen's films), comic reliefs, and there is also an apparently 'psychologist' talking to each character, inter called with their actions. What I like the most in Allen's films is the character development. Is so beautifully made, and so simple at the same time. He in fact has a unique way to do it. In my opinion, he is better than his biggest idol on cinema, Ingmar Bergman, which also was excellent. The editing also makes it looks like a found footage film, and the cinematography may be comparable to an actual sitcom, like The Office, for example(being said Husband and Wives was released ten years before the aforementioned TV-show), full of zoom-ins and shaky camera, looking like an amateurish thing. Interesting choice. And no, it not abuses at all of that so 'controversial' techniques.There are a few recognizable faces in the film, Woody Allen himself, Mia Farrow, Juliette Lewis, Liam Neeson…they all gave average to good performances, what is usual in Allen films(for some reason). If you are a Allen fan, you cannot skip that film. 8.5/10