XIXAX Film Forum

Film Discussion => The Vault => Topic started by: wilder on April 21, 2016, 03:29:21 PM

Title: Cafe Society
Post by: wilder on April 21, 2016, 03:29:21 PM

Written and Directed by Woody Allen
Cinematography by Vittorio Storaro
Starring Jeannie Berlin, Kristen Stewart, Jesse Eisenberg, Blake Lively, Parker Posey and Steve Carell
Release Date - TBD, Cannes premiere

Title: Re: Cafe Society
Post by: Alexandro on April 22, 2016, 09:42:31 AM
Oh shit. This actually looks pretty good.
Could Allen be in another of his comebacks?
Check out Storaro's cinematography, there's a couple of movements that feel new for Allen in the trailer, and the colors too. It feels like a new kind of thing for him, if that's even possible.
Title: Re: Cafe Society
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on April 22, 2016, 10:03:09 AM
I don't see so much in the lighting, but yeah, there seem to be some movements and angles that don't really feel very Woody. After Mehgic in the Moonlight and an interesting-but-not-great-by-any-means Irrational Man, it's time for another hit.
Title: Re: Cafe Society
Post by: Alexandro on April 22, 2016, 11:04:05 AM
well, the use of the color blue stands out in the first shots. that's easily more storaro than allen.
there are more chiaroscuros and shadows in the next few shots than usual too.
there seems to be more steadycam use, and allen usually blocks scenes on a tripod and just pointing the camera at wherever the actor's move.
lighting sources are more directed to certain points in the frame, giving it more depth than the stuff in From Rome with Love or even Midnight in Paris, for example (which looked beautiful too, of course).
there is a shot of a car, the camera on the floor looking up, feels fresh for him.
there are a couple of other things.
and also is both storaro's and allen's first film in digital, it seems they're having fun with it.

Title: Re: Cafe Society
Post by: jenkins on April 22, 2016, 11:41:45 AM
glad it looks good because it sounds like shit.
Title: Re: Cafe Society
Post by: jenkins on May 04, 2016, 05:10:32 PM
The Woody Allen Interview (Which He Won't Read)

Have you changed over the years?

I do think I evolved artistically. When I first started making movies, I was interested in just the jokes. Then, over the years, I became more ambitious and wanted to do deeper works or better works. And this is either a good thing, depending on where you sit, or a bad thing. There are people that would say, "I think this is great and very healthy and you went on to make some very good films," or they could say, "You never should have done [that]."

I wanted to do kind of a novel on film, about a family and the relationships of the members toward one another, and the protagonist’s love relationship,” he explained. “I wanted it to have the structure of a novel, so I could move around and dwell on various members of the family. That’s why I narrated it because I was sort of the writer of the novel that you were experiencing when you saw the film.

Do you read a lot in general?

I never enjoyed reading. I was not a bookish guy. I read comic books till I was 18. I read over the decades because one has to read to survive in life. But it's not what I do for pleasure. I'd always rather watch a baseball game or a basketball game or go to the movies or listen to music.

Do you still watch a lot of films?

There aren't a lot of films that interest me. When I first had this screening room 30 years ago, 35 years ago, I used to be able to come here every Saturday night and see something with my friends. But that doesn't happen anymore.

Last year, you seemed to regret embarking on a TV show. Do you still regret it?

It was much harder to do than I thought. I thought, "I'll sandwich this in between two films and knock it off. What's the big deal? It's tele­vision." But over the years, television has made enormous strides, and wonderful things are being done on television. And I found as soon as I started to get into the project, I couldn't bring myself to slough it off because this is not television of 50 years ago, where every silly thing was acceptable. You're working in a medium that has grown up and has got wonderful things being done in it, and, yes, you may prove to be an embarrassment, but you don't want to be a total embarrassment.

Title: Re: Cafe Society
Post by: wilder on September 06, 2016, 05:06:29 PM
Blu-ray (https://www.amazon.com/Cafe-Society-Blu-ray/dp/B01JH4G6FM?SubscriptionId=AKIAIY4YSQJMFDJATNBA&tag=bluray-011-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B01JH4G6FM&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER) on October 18th
Title: Re: Cafe Society
Post by: Alexandro on October 05, 2016, 11:59:17 PM
For what it's worth, I enjoyed this one more than Midnight in Paris and Blue Jasmine, Woody's latest "celebrated" films.
The film has three things going for it:

1. It doesn't take itself too seriously. It aims to entertain, show a particular world and tell a good love story. And it doesn't tell you where it's going from the beginning, which makes the whole ride way more interesting than something like Irrational Man, where five minutes in you already know what will roll.
2. Storaro's work is beautiful. There's a candlelight scene about half way through, very simple, but powerful. It's a delightful film to just watch; colors, movements. Really good stuff.
3. The cast is awesome. Everyone is great, really. Some critics claim the film belongs to Stewart, and she is terrific. I hope Woody casts her more, and I hope she does more comedies. She really nails every single line in this. But Eisenberg and Carell are great too. There are a bunch of scenes which made me laugh out loud, particularly one between those two. You can sense the actors are enjoying the scenes. And all the supporting cast does this too. I don't know what it is, or what it depends on, but the film just works.

Also, the ending is great. I'm sure I'll revisit it soon. Not to be missed.
Title: Re: Cafe Society
Post by: ElPandaRoyal on October 06, 2016, 08:16:30 AM
I completely agree. It's a wonderful little film that's just so lovely on almost every level. I am at odds trying to figure out why it has been largely ignored by everyone, as there is a sweetness, humour, and just plain class in this movie that we just don't see often these days. And yeah, Alexandro, some posts ago we talked about the cinematography, both camera movements and angles as well as the light, and it does feel kind of fresh for Allen and works very very well in this. Great performances all around (I think this is Eisenberg's best to date).