Genres

Visitors Review

Christopher 2012-05-22 14:30:08

Movie Stars Behaving Badly!

Celebrity (1998)Woody Allen accomplishes what Bob Altman attempted in Ready to Wear: showing lots of movie stars and model types acting like, well movie stars and model types. Pretty boy Leo DiCaprio has a good turn as a hotshot, teen throb amidst orgies and dramatic posturing. Lots of selfish, crude behavior on the part of everyone makes this a veritable "How to Succeed in Hollywood" movie, though I wonder if that was Woody's intention.

Arthur Lazere 2012-05-21 22:20:36

Incisive observation of contemporary values and mores, delivered with a lot of laughs.

jbels 2012-05-19 14:10:07

Nearly his worst save for one thing

This would have been Allen's worst film hands down if not for one thingandthat is Charlize Theron's face. Anything with this striking woman has atthe very least going for it her beautiful face. Otherwise this is sodreadful. The banana scene is Woody at his lowest.

yossi forkush 2012-05-19 04:37:01

not funny but still make you think

well its not so funny but if you are a guy it gives you something to thinkof.i did had some argues about the issue of living togetherand sex,but if you are not in the mood for words...

van 2012-05-18 12:18:52

This would have been great in 1968

This would have been considered a sleeper in 1968, but trite and cliche in1998. Branagh appears to be trying to "do" Woody, who apparently allowedthis travesty. This Manhattan murder was no mystery. Although thecharacter's conflict were Catholic guilt/sex and neurosis, Branaghdesperately imitates a classic neurotic Jewish writer, even doing Woody'sstammers and stutters. What were they thinking? It was death without love. Ifound only one or two slight grins in the interiors of this psycho-comedy,the largest was when I went to the restroom knowing I wouldn't missanything. The second when I fantasized Branagh saying "TB are not TB(cough, cough)that is the congestion" from "Everything You Wanted toKnow..."I hate to be deconstructing Woody, I weep for his past genius. He is eitherbananas or he decided to take the money and run. Now he is remakingManhattan/Annie Hall hoping they won't be seen hiding under a new title. Ifyou ever watched an old friend tell the same tired story over and overhoping someone will cheer it again, you'll cry for Celebrity. Don't play itagain, Woody. You're no longer the champ and you will never be again. Itis better to stand on your laurels, than soil your Depends.With all of the real celebrities you'd think this movie would have beentouted from all of the NY/LA roof tops, but I imagined the Celebs, paid notto be associated with this sick flick. Maybe young film makers will look atthis and say, "When my day in the sun is over, just shoot me, don't let memake a movie like Celebrity."

brocksilvey 2012-05-17 18:58:09

An Unfairly Dismissed Woody Allen Movie

"Celebrity" was pretty much maligned back during its initial release,but my wife and I had a blast with it, and I think it deserves a secondlook from people who dismissed it the first time around.Kenneth Branagh is an able Allen stand in, playing a writer strugglingwith all of the things characters in Woody Allen movies struggle with.But it's the story of his ex-wife, played by Judy Davis almost as aparody of herself from other Allen movies, that's most memorable. Oneof the film's highlights is Davis's character receiving advice on howto administer oral sex from a hooker, played by Bebe Neuwirth. Let'sjust say a banana and a close call are involved.The night my wife and I saw this, we lost our car in the parking lot ofthe movie theater and wandered around in a frigid Chicago night,giggling because we couldn't find it. The situation was made evenfunnier because we kept crossing paths with another couple who had lostTHEIR car, and were giggling because they couldn't find their's either.Maybe that's why I have such fond memories of this movie.Grade: A-

Torrance-4 2012-05-16 22:40:16

The Mystery of Celebrity

The director is the CELEBRITY, and everyone wants to be in his movies!Howelse do you explain:a) Kenneth Branagh being reduced to doing an impression of a neurotic NewYorker with a thing for women much younger than himself.b) Melanie Griffith using her head with the director'simpersonator.c) Charlize Theron being polymorphously perverse.d) Judy Davis and Bebe Neuwirth fellating bananas together.e) Leonardo DiCaprio sharing his bed and two women with the director'simpersonator.f) Winona Ryder (looking gorgeous) in a scene where she kisses anotherwoman.g) Winona Ryder in a relationship with the director'simpersonator.How many director's fantasies can fit into one movie?All in all, as a true fan of the Woodman's work, it did make me laugh.Highly recommended to all the Woody lovers out there who have made him theCELEBRITY that he is.

V Hanna 2012-05-16 13:51:49

Woody Allen meet Spike Lee

To borrow a line from the movie 'A Bronx Tale' somebody should tell Mr.Allen "the saddest thing in life is wasted talent." This movie hadpotentialflowing out of every orifice that it is truly tragic. I know at least tendirectors who could have made this script humm like an engine on a 57Chevy.First mistake was having the lead male Kenneth Branagh do a Woody Allenimpression. I sat there saying to myself over and over what the hell areyoudoing. Next mistake was making the movie have absolutely no character youcan connect to and feel some kind of emotion for. Maybe that was good fromastandpoint that it reminds you that you need someone the audience canconnect to in some way otherwise you're left with a grand canyon likevoid.One of the few redeeming scenes was one involving DiCaprio as a youngimmature actor. I am almost positive that anybody watching him tear up hishotel room and cavort around with gorgeous women, drugs included, couldn'thelp smirk at the likely hood that he has had some practice at situationslike that. Bebe Neuwirth had the other redeeming scene as a prostituteattempting to showcase the art of fellatio on a piece of fruit, alla 'FastTimes at Ridgmont High', unsuccessfully. Melanie Griffith has a smallineffective role, Judy Davis struck me as extremely repulsive even towardsthe end of the movie, and Joe Mantegna gets a shot to display more of hislimited acting ability. What potential flushed down the toilet we callHollywood. Why do I say Woody meet Spike in my subject line? Because thosetwo filmmakers have made movies that have amounted to nicely formed pilesofdung. Spike has at least at times shown potential for getting out of hisuntalented hole but Woody seems to feel driven to continue to use his namesolely as a driving force. And all those actors still buy into it and hisoutdated potential. Shame on them! I know and you know they have talentbutthey continue to put out movies that fall shorter in results than asoldieron the first day of basic training. How do you sit in an editing room andlook at the final copy of this film and say 'oh yea this is a great film.'This movie definitely puts Woody on one of those one hit wonder shows. Itseems like a long way from 'Annie Hall' and he still can't find thatmagic.Somebody get this guy a road map or at least make him take filmmaking 101over again.

akkasha 2012-05-12 11:14:33

Dull, Dull, Dull w/Branagh at His Worst Ever...

I must say, I didn't expect much from this film to begin with. Yet, itevenmanaged to fail in the little bit of hope I had for it. Branagh wasabysmalin his performance. He may have been aiming for a young Woody Allen butinstead comes across as a pathetic caracature of half wit with a speechimpediment.There was not a single character in the movie that you could care about,either enough to love or hate them. No one in the cast brought enoughdimension to any character to make them anything more than cartoons...andnot interesting ones at that.Perhaps this is supposed to be some grand statement on the character of'Celebrity' in our current society. However, if that was the intention,itbackfired in making a film so dull that you have trouble retaining anyinterest at all.Woody, please, if this is the best you can do these days, stick to playingyour clarinet. With this last effort, it seems you have lost your knackatmaking a decent film.

ktsetsi 2012-05-11 19:37:45

Overkill

I would love to see a Woody Allen movie in which an actor does notbecome the Woody Allen character.Allen's writing has always had me coming back to his movies, cravinghis movies. The brutal honesty, the varied (but still carbon copiedfrom movie to movie) characters, the merging story lines...Today, while browsing the satellite menu, I saw "Celebrity" listed onIFC. I turned it on (not remembering it was an Allen movie), saw JudyDavis, and kept it on.Then I heard Kenneth Branagh talk and I knew I was watching a WoodyAllen movie. I'd have been thrilled that it was a Woody Allen movie hadKenneth Branagh not been acting as Woody Allen.Allen is creative enough to be so much more creative than he is, andhe's appreciated and known enough for his writing and his charactersalone to be able to spread out, a little. To let a movie exist withouthis character stuttering and floundering around in it.It could be argued that the Allen character is what makes a Woody Allenmovie a Woody Allen movie.I disagree. There is and has always been so much more to his moviesthan just the neurotic and confused older man that they would do justfine - and maybe even better - without other actors being assigned toplay a character that lends little more to an Allen movie than a sense,for the viewer, of having seen that movie ten times,already. Even whenthey haven't seen it before.

JawsOfJosh 2012-05-09 10:34:38

A muddled but enjoyable spin on the effects of fame

After continually bringing his audience through one high after another witha brilliant comeback in the 90's, Woody Allen has a little bit of a letdown- but still manages to entertain - with "Celebrity". There are manycomponents of the film that make sense, but the whole balance betweenshowcasing the pratfalls of fame and chronicling his usualneurotic-Manhattan marital fallout don't always work. Why Allen castBranaugh to play "Woody" is puzzling. Perhaps Woody is all too aware of theaudience's despondence with him cuddling up to women one-third his age, ormaybe Branaugh was used just to see what kind of response it would provoke. Either way, Branaugh does well; it just depends if you can stomach himplaying Woody.There are as many good jokes here as any other Woody film, but the frame ofreference is different. His jokes don't exclusively concern the absurdityof fame, but also how ridiculously far it extends into American culture andhow it's now seen as the ultimate power play. The fame of religion, sex,excess, the lack thereof and the just plain fame of fame ("It's allshowbusiness!" Branaugh complains). Allen acutely demonstrates how famecorrupts a person (Branaugh shamelessly hawking his screenplay) and how someseem to find normalcy in life despite it (Joe Mantenga's easy-going TVproducer). We also see how the culture of celebrity affects everyday peopleand how they think. Witness the scene where a group of rabbis, appearing ona talk show, calmly ask beforehand "Have the skinheads eaten all thebagels?" Meaning it didn't matter to a group of Jewish clergymen that theywere sharing a green room with Nazis, because they're about to be on TV. Also consider the scene where the wonderful Judy Davis (somewhat reprisingher excellent role in the fantastic "Deconstructing Harry") seeks out a highclass hooker with nervous, star-struck adoration in search of sexualadvice.Just when the film starts to sag (or seem in search of a plot) we are givena brief jolt by the crafty Leonardo DiCaprio. Woody may have predicted theattention DiCaprio was about to attract with "Titanic" and offered him thisrole out of sympathy. DiCaprio gives a frenetic cameo as Brandon Darrow,allowing him to lampoon his public image before the press ever constructedit: that of the young, spoiled movie star. With this bit part, DiCapriojoins Woody in extending his middle finger towards the media (as Woody hadbeen doing in his work throughout the late 90's). Overall, the film isquite puzzled in its presentation. The black-and-white cinematography is anice touch, it's doubtful Woody chose B&W for the same panoramic methods heheld in the late 70's / early 80's. I assume the B&W photography wasdesigned to impress you with more of a behind-the-scenes feel. Maybe someof the humor got lost in Woody's determination to hold contempt for thefamous high life, but "Celebrity" is worth one look if you consider yourselfa mild Woody fan.

Cameron 2012-05-09 04:40:44

One of Allen's most disappointing

Any director as prolific as Woody Allen is bound to have some successes andsome failures. In this case, "Celebrity" is mostly a failure; it's not aterrible film, but when compared to most other Woody Allen movies it revealsitself to be a truly mediocre effort. While I don't have a problem with thegrittiness that Allen has chosen to portray, and I don't think it's bad thatthe movie is in black & white, the movie itself just isn't very satisfying -there aren't very many funny or dramatic sequences. It sort of feels likeAllen is going through the motions. For Woody fans only.

Poochie 2012-05-08 01:26:59

Ho-Hum

Very familiar territory revisited here...I kept thinking of Laraine Newmanin 'Stardust Memories' saying "I've seen it all before. They try todocument their private suffering and fob it off as art." It's well made butnot very interesting (at all). The scene where Judy Davis is given oral sexlessons from Bebe Neuwirth was particularly un-funny. I normally love WoodyAllen films but I could not/would not recommend this one.

rbverhoef 2012-05-07 15:51:04

Not bad, not great either

The problem with Woody Allen is that he has made great films, a lot,and that expectations for his work are always high. With 'Celebrity' itwas not different and therefore it is a little disappointing. Ifanother writer director would have made this film I think I would haveliked it better. Maybe that is strange, to compare it with his otherfilms simply happens.In 'Celebrity' we follow Kenneth Branagh who plays Woody Allen,although he is named Lee Simon. A movie without Woody Allen himself isnice, but with a character that basically is Allen, why not play ityourself? On the other hand, Branagh does a terrific job. We see howBranagh divorces his wife and after that we have single episodes of hislife where he meets women, tries to make them his, fails or succeeds,only to enter the next episode. At the same time we follow his ex-wife,Robin (Judy Davis), who meets a new man Tony (Joe Mantegna) and doessettle.Branagh is a writer. He writes a novel, has written two novels with badreviews and now he finished a screenplay. In the episodes he tries tooffer his script or new novel to people who can change it into a movieor book. We have Melanie Griffith and Leonardo DiCaprio as spoiledactors, Famke Janssen as a girl who really likes him and could help gethis story into a book, Winona Ryder as the girl he has some realchemistry with and Charlize Theron as a supermodel.The problem is that every episode feels like an episode instead ofeverything combined as a movie. The Theron and DiCaprio episodes aregreat, the Winona Ryder episode is sweet, the others are prettystandard. The intercuts of the ex-wife's life are pretty good as well,but still feel as single episodes.Although the film as a whole is not that great there are enough momentsto enjoy it. You will not be bored. The black and white photographylooks terrific and that is something that makes the movie morepleasant. It is well acted and of course directed, but for a WoodyAllen comedy it is not my first choice.

afoo-2 2012-05-07 07:52:56

another satire from Woody Allen,though meeker than former

I just finished the B&W movie.Expectably funny marked by style ofWoody.though,it felt a little meeker than his former ones:&etc.I heard some about the private life of Woody.I believe he has fullyunderstood what celebrity life is like.and he has showed us that by gentlysatirizing and sober portrayal.Sitting before the screen, we r led to lookinto the inside of "celebrity",how they got the fame,trying to sustainit,and the emptiness behind the flashlights everywhere.the performances r all satisfactory.Kenneth Branagh and Judy Devis areperfect,and Malenie as well.She's really charming.The background music is some Jazz,which seems Woody's favorite.fits the theme well.and the last point:I enjoyed Winona Ryder again.Thanks toWoody!

jetwimp 2012-05-06 22:39:38

a grisly failure

Those who doubt the ability of cinema to delineate the inhuman will havetheir minds changed by this catastrophe of a film. Kenneth Branagh, doing adogged but effective imitation of the film's director, Woody Allen, plays aself-obsessed would-be novelist circulating in the demimonde of Manhattanartistic chic. He is plagued with a pointless case of satyriasis; hisincessantly propelling lust seems to have neither a emotional nor, weirdlyenough, even a physical dimension. I thought of the shades circulating andmoaning in the eight circle of Dante's hell. Humorless, solipsistic (aliterary critic in the film uses that wonderful word to describe thecharacter's writing), fretful, unfetching, he brings to mind the classiclament of the unrealized dweeb: `I'm not much, but I'm all I ever thinkabout.' I found the film both sad and frightening, although it was intended to beneither. I also was reminded of the famous play of Sartre, although herethe Huis Clos is all of Manhattan, rather than one room. I will mentiononly a single humiliating scene, that in which a hooker, teaching Judy Davisto administer oral sex, chokes on the banana serving as the instructionaltool and has to be administered the Heimlich maneuver.I'm sorry that it took 9/11 to overshadow this artistic train wreck, and toconvince us that that city has both love and soul, and is populated not withDantean shades sniggering as they lavish their emptiness on each other, butrather with real people and their attendant hopes and agonies. By contrast,all the characters in this film were nothing more than colliding oilslicks.Woody has enlisted the talents of some of the world's great actors, but towhat end? Branagh is a consummate technician, and there is not a singlefalse note in his American accent nor, indeed, in the speech of any othernon-American native in the film, including Judy Davis. One should carefullycompare Branagh's performance in this film, though, with that in themasterful 2001 tv film `The Conspiracy.' The subject there is the Wanseeconference wherein the details of the final solution were hammered out. Branagh plays Oberstgruppenfuhrer Reinhard Heydrich, Head of the SecurityPolice and Security Service, the architect of the master plan to rid Europeof its Jews. Powerful, charismatic, twinkling with irony, deeplyfrightening, Branagh's portrait of this ubermonster is flawless, and thecontrast with the present performance suggests, disturbingly enough, thatevil, at least artistically, may sometimes be more moral thanvapidity.

Ron 2012-05-04 06:35:05

My general impression

I have seen many Woody Allen films, and have tired of his nervousstuttering. I thought I might be spared that in this movie because hedoesnot appear in it. Unfortunately, the star mimics Woody's style, which isworse than watching Woody himself.

will_boy99 2012-05-03 15:17:21

Leo steals the show!

Although Celebrity is not one of Woody Allen's best films there are somegood things about it. Leonardo DiCaprio steals the show and perks thewholefilm up with his performance. He proves once again how talented he is. Asfar as people saying that he is "playing himself" or even implying that heis, is just plain stupid if not unfair. Leo is ACTING! I don't see howanybody knows if he is playing himself unless they know him. It would benice if people could get that into their heads. All the rest of the castsuch as Judy Davis, Charlize Theron, and Winnona Ryder are very good too.This story of a journalist (played by Kenneth Branagh) trying to interviewthe Celebrities is sometimes funny but not that bad. If nothing else watchit for the great performances by an all star cast.

John Acquadro 2012-05-01 19:01:16

"Celebrity": Uneven and Undeveloped

Upon the first viewing of Allen's latest, I extremely enjoyed this new lookon a society that "took a wrong turn somewhere." The sexual jokes (really,the only type of jokes were sexual) wore thin during the second viewing andthe fact that the screenplay was underdeveloped and "sub-Allen" became moreapparent as did the poor choice of Branagh being cast as the Woodycharacter. Why do so many find Branagh's impression insufferable? Perhapsbecause his very character is unnecessary. If Allen had taken the time totie the chracters together with a device other than a very weak andsoul-sick character, the movie would have been much more watchable. Althoughcertain critics were harsh with his greater films like "DeconstructingHarry," this one deserves some of the criticism. The other actors are wellcast, though they are put in with the horrible Branagh, who ruins the film.There are other inconsistencies (like Tony's attraction to Robin) andundeveloped glimpses of genius (like Lee's line about writing about hisperfect woman and then meeting her), none of them hurt the film as much asthe main, yet unnecessary character.

Piloti 2012-05-01 01:58:47

Celebrity is THE best WA film in years...!!!!

A few years ago I took my girlfriend to the IMAX screen in neighbouringBradford to see the comedy musical 'Everyone says I love You'. She wentalong because she quite likes Goldie Hawn. She quite enjoyedit.Since then I have persuaded her to see some more of Allens excellentfilms,such as Manhatten (just about the best film ever made) Play it again Samandnow Celebrity. Again at the IMAX we revelled in the truly magnificantperformance that Brannagh gave, quite clearly playing the role that was/isAllen, but playing it so well.There were some of Allens best lines in this movie, some of his bestvisualgags, and some excellent performances from people who, on the whole arenotrenowned for their acting skills. As usual Allen gets the best from peopleand he deserves applauding for this.The cinematography, as usual, was excellent, the dialogue first rate, thescore as ever will make another exspensive but wonderfulalbum.Over all, I would say that this is the best film since Manhatten. In yearsto come this film WILL rank as one of the best films he has ever made. Thefact that he was playing to a 75% full cinema at 4pm on a Tuesdayafternoonis a testimony of the draw that this man has. And herein lies thedichotomy.He fills the 'arty' and off-beat cinemas, but main stream won't show him.Some films never even make it across the water. Yet Allen has films thatmain stream would die for, if only they were not fed the big budgetHollywood dross of the Armegeddon genre.Woody Allen films should be shown along side the big budget special fxdriven films with thin plots and see though dialogue. They should be madeavailable to all, to see how real film making can and is being done.Long live Woody Allen and long may he make films of the quality ofCelebrity.As he says in the film, 'It is amazing who the public choose tocelebrate.'I choose Woody Allen.