Yes, I've brought him up again. He's making a lot of appearances these days. I guess he's promoting 'Hollywood Ending'. With this ARTICLE[/b]</font color=blue> though, it sounds more like damage control.<br><br>What irks me is that Woody basically uses an interview to telegraph the following idea: Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplain, W.C. Fields, Bob Hope and The Marx Brothers all faded out. None of these greats ended on career high notes, or even at moderate respectability.<br><br>There's a deceptive analogy being made, which must be first addressed. Why is Woody comparing himself to three silent era legends? A humble person might not so quickly compare himself to Charlie Chaplain, for example. Even if one must, the silent actors are out as analogous careers, since they had to transition from silent to sound, which killed most silent actors. That leaves Bob Hope, who really wasn't a writer, director, filmmaker type. <br><br>This leaves the Marx Brothers as the only decent analogy. Still, if I asked you to come up with someone(s) who had an analogous career to the Marx Bros, you'd probably find the Three Stooges more similar than Woody Allen, right?<br><br>So, nothing personal Woody-- because I love you and your work-- this argument is a shell game.<br><br>The real discussion is do writer/directors.. or major filmmakers like Spielberg, Coppola, Scorcese, Spike Lee.. grow tired and confused with age. I may have left out an even more analogous filmmaker, but my point is, what's Woody comparing himself to Buster Keaton for?<br><br><br><br>Do you rhumba? Excellent! Now pick a rhumba and sit down.. GM
I don't get the impression that it's such a deep musing. It was probably one of his lists made late one night: list of funny filmmakers/stars who faded out. Or the short list of those who didn't. George Burns, though not a writer/director, was funny till he died. Carol Burnett couldn't be funny now if they painted a mustache on her and had her do the lambada. <br><br>Allen's genuinely worried, but then when hasn't he been? Jade Scorpion was no blockbuster, just a mild heartwarmer with some good lines. But I'd watch it one more time. On the other hand, his early comedies still strike a nerve in kids today. My kids became Woody fans, and had the advantage of being able to watch anything he made as many times as they wanted, when they wanted, rather than waiting for and watching those which managed to make the theater rounds where I lived when Woody was on his upswing. <br><br>Woody compares himself to the silent stars simply because they were funny, and because later they were not. The changeover from silent to sound was huge, but then so have been the changeovers from b&w to color, low budget to astronomical budget, film to digital, special effects, surround sound. Woody still makes movies the old way, and it shows. He feels the need to reinvent himself as much as Chaplin or Keaton did, but doesn't know how, wouldn't do it anyway, and so he wonders if he can keep attracting an audience with ideas, not technology. On that level, Jade Scorpion worked pretty well considering all the above. <br><br>So, in the end I don't think he's drawing comparisons in an egotistical manner, but simply looking forward and saying, "will I be able to continue doing the only thing I know how to do? These other guys were not able to do that." But I feel the same thing he is also telegraphing to those who will hear it: greatness is an illusion. What matters is working. You can look at him as a huge ego or as a modest man, but the fact is that he has continued to work, his way, and attract audiences for at least 35 years, and he always did it with just one goal in mind; fill up his time with meaningful work. Greatness is the illusion that others painted over him, and which they currently do with Spielberg, Scorcese, Lucas, etc., etc. Few of these people will be immortal, if any. Woody's films survive because they deal with one thing and one thing only: human ideas. There is no technology, no stylistic trend (though he set some early on), no fad. And for that reason he's got every bit of a chance of surviving as an artist, while Spielberg has just become another brand name. Woody knows that as well as we do, but he still has the rest of his life to live out, and he doesn't want to quit. I find that admirable. I hope that the times don't "Buster Keatonize" him. The analogy is perfectly valid.<br><br>Shooshie<br><br>Shooshie's Stuff
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.