PopcornTreeCt

I saw this movie the other day and thought it was real good. The British Joaquin Phoenix did a fantastic job. I always get a kick out of 'Barry Lyndon' stories and this movie was fantastic. Everyone in the cast did a perfect job it reminded me of The Rules of the Game in the sense that stuffy rich people are so involved in themselves that they can't see anything else going on.

Dr. DVD

Saw it today. FWIW, I started out loathing the movie while I was watching it, but as the climax drew near and I figured out the major theme of the movie, I wound up liking it a lot. I agree that Rhys-Meyers is the one deserving the attention and not Johannsen; she was annoying to me. I also have to give kudos to Allen as he made quite an impressive foray into film noir. The movie is defnitely deserving of its nod for Best Screenplay.

Now why I went from loathing the movie to liking it:

badger1997

Just got around to seeing this last night and I really think your point about the screenplay is the reason behind that scene at the ping pong table. I think it was the dialogue in that scene that was horrible and not sure any actors could have turned that around.

Actually, I read two reviews of the movie and my friend went to see it as well. All three sources said they don't think Woody has an ear for how people, and especially people today, talk. That scene reinforces that idea more than anything else. It was like out of a hardboiled pulp fiction dime novel.

But other than that, good movie, highly recommended and just great to watch it all unfold. I could complain that it was a bit long-winded, but not much I would specifically change. Too bad not very many people will go see this film in the end (or even seemingly hear of it for that matter) because they are missing a great performance from Rhys Meyers was mesmorizing in this film in my opinion.

shaggy

Where have you been for the last 10 years? This movie would have done better if Woody's name wasn't on it. He has been getting killed by critics and fans alike. While his films of the last 10 years may not live up to his incredibly high standards, they have been quite good.

I have no opinion on your review of the film, film taste is completely subjective but I had to take issue with your comment about it getting unfair praise because its Woody Allen. Don't you think made for TV movie is pushing it a little too far? OK sorry, I promised not to criticize your criticism.

movielib

You are absolutely correct. Woody Allen's films have been sub-par for a long time and the critics have rightly not been at all kind. MP got good reviews because it is an excellent film, Allen's best in a long, long time (although I quite liked Melinda and Melinda too).

conscience

No this movie would not have done better if his name wasn't on it. With Allen's recent outings being completely horrid, MP seems to be a revelation in comparison by critic and fan standards (just look at the reviews saying it is his best in years which is most likely true - but not saying much). I don't agree with their views. I thought it was an average film that had too many cliched moments and is getting unfair acclaim because of Allen's name (just because it is of better quality than his work over the past decade).

And I don't have any care in the world if you have an opinion of my opinions.

RichC2

I'm not a big Woody Allen fan, but have to say I really enjoyed this movie.

It's got wonderful foreshadowing, well developed characters, an interesting viewpoint, and is morally ambiguous. Above all that, I was really entertained by it - kind of similar in fashion to A History of Violence, some standard elements with terrific execution.

cfloyd3

I am somewhat in agreement with conscience here. I don't like Rhys-Meyers that much in comparison to everyone else here. He seems to always be sucking his face in preparing to pose for GQ. I don't need photoshoot scowling. I think Johansson was the best part of the film myself. The ping pong table thing is a bit awkward and seems out of place but at the same time I think she captured some nuances such as in the drinking/table scenes where she had to be at her best. The story was pretty commonplace, as was the direction for the most part. It seemed too much like Allen was smirking at the audience for most of the film until the eventual surprising turn where he put on a full grin. Mortimer and Cox didn't really add much at all to their parts. The supporting cast as Popcorn said just seemed to be there to be filler self important types.

I liked the film overall I just had some issues with it. I don't consider it to be a great film but I would call it worth watching. If you haven't seen Manhattan I think that is his best film. I was surprised the other day to be browsing IMDB and noticed how many Allen films I had seen now (8).

flixtime

Just watched this one and thought it was terrific! I've yet to see "Syriana" and "Munich", but off the top of my head "Match Point" wound rank in my top 5 for English-language films of 2005. If it matters one way or the other, I'm not really a fan of Woody Allen's work in general. Clocking in at over 2 hours, this film had me under its spell from start to finish (given its comparitively slower pacing it might be better suited for home viewing as opposed to the theater). Personally, I thought it moved along quite well but I can see where many might call it on the slow side. I enjoyed the dialogue and the performances were uniformly excellent.....the story too of course. The movie has a certain Hitchcock vibe or maybe also something like "The Talented Mr. Ripley". Anyway, I just wanted to give the film a plug. It was just released on DVD and yet there hasn't been a post in this discussion for the past three weeks, so in that way I'd just like to suggest it for further consideration. While I'm aware that it did receive a fair amount of critical recognition, I truly feel it is deserving of far greater recognition from the viewing public as well.

Rypro 525

I enjoyed it surprisingly, I am no woody fan by any means. it played like fatal attraction with the exception of the last 20 or so minutes. Oh yeah, and why the hell was this rated R? granted due to the slow pacing of the movie, most teens wouldn't have cared for it any ways, but still, I've seen raunchier and more explicit sex scenes on network television, and the worst they get is maybe a tv-14 or a PG-13 in movie terms.