Match Point

Haven't posted anything in a while. My story's been kinda bogged down; probably at least partially because I was never really sure where it was going. Wrote a bit yesterday and it was like pulling teeth. I'll probably fire that up in a bit and take a look at it, try to get some more down and then I might post it if I reach my word goal for the day.

In any event, went to go see Match Point yesterday. Let me preface the rest of this by saying I do think Woody Allen is/was a genius. Annie Hall, Manhattan and Hannah and Her Sisters are all among the best movies I've seen, in terms of dialogue, acting and directing. Bullets Over Broadway was great too, but in a completely different way from those three.

That said, I don't know what all the fuss being made of Match Point is all about. It's not a bad movie, but neither is it a good one. First of all, it's about a half hour too long. Most of that half hour is in the start, which is EXCRUCIATING. I don't know when it became ok for movies to be 2 hours 20 minutes +, but I really fucking hate it.

I think the biggest problem with the movie is that it's set in London. First because of the casting decisions that had to be made based off of that, and second because the rhythms of the dialogue were all off. Neurotic-Manhattan-Jew doesn't really work with cultured english accents (I know, who would have guessed). Honestly? Jonathan Rhys-Meyers sucked. GODDAMN AWFUL. Every time he talked the energy just went waaaaaay down.

The other problem is that it wasn't really what I was expecting. Match Point has a lot more in common with Hannah and Her Sisters than the other three Allen movies I mentioned, in that it's a morality play for the one character. And that's fine, it just took me 45 minutes or so to get through the painful beginning and then another 15 minutes or so when it settled into that (a morality play) until I could say, ok, that's what it is, and then start to enjoy it as that and not as a lighter Woody Allen comedy (which is what I was expecting/hoping for). But Rhys-Meyers is no Michael Caine (the cheating married man in Hannah), so he can't really carry the action effectively.

Another odd disappointment was that it didn't really feel like a Woody Allen movie, and I think that comes back to the casting again. What I mean by that is that Allen is known for his endless shots with a wide frame, showing the entirety of the action and using fewer closeup shots than other directors. Watch Annie Hall and notice how many shots the camera never moves, or how dolly moves are used to create a single, continuous scene within an apartment and you'll see what I mean. Michael Caine mentioned that in shooting Hannah, Woody Allen would film everything - rehearsals, takes and garbage bits where he would let actors do what they felt like doing. But Match Point is cut differently, with the majority of the dialogue coming in one shots, when only one character is shown on screen, and I really think it was because of the limitations of the actors he was dealing with. I found it interesting to note that when Scarlett Johansson was onscreen and in conversations, the majority of the camera's focus was on her, even though Rhys-Meyers is the protagonist. I don't really know what to think about Scarlett, but those thoughts probably belong in another post.

The ending is interesting, the main theme discussed in the movie is interesting, if a bit clumsy and blatant at times, and Scarlett looks spectacular throughout. A lot of the supporting actors are familiar faces and are do decent jobs in their roles. So, as I said...not bad, but not really good either. Not the first time I've watched a critically acclaimed movie and left saying, "What the hell is that all about?"