Woody Allen, Cipher

We know Woody Allen is good, but how good? Peter Biskind is on the case

My mailman only relinquished my copy of December's Vanity Fair about five days ago, at least a week after it hit newsstands. I just yesterday had a chance to read Peter Biskind's fascinating (if not periodically repellent) profile of the soon-to-be-septuagenarian Woody Allen. Above and beyond the filmmaker's skin-crawling candor, however, Biskind's piece invokes a fun new pastime you can try at home to impress and eventually alienate your film-snob buddies:

If you play the parlor game How Few Outstanding Films Are Necessary to Create the Reputation for Being a Great Director, you arrive at a surprisingly low number. Look at some of Allen's contemporaries: Bob Rafelson, one (Five Easy Pieces); Peter Bogdanovich, two (The Last Picture Show, Paper Moon); William Friedkin, two (The French Connection, The Exorcist); Robert Altman, four (M*A*S*H, McCabe & Mrs. Miller, Nashville, The Player); and so on. Even Allen's beloved Francois Truffaut directed only three masterpieces, all early in his career: The 400 Blows, Jules and Jim and Shoot the Piano Player. By this standard alone, Allen is an auteur among auteurs. Among his 35 films, there are a good 10 that can hold their own against any of those just mentioned: Annie Hall, Manhattan, The Purple Rose of Cairo, Broadway Danny Rose, Zelig, Hannah and Her Sisters, Crimes and Misdemeanors, Husbands and Wives, Bullets Over Broadway, Deconstructing Harry, and now Match Point, not to mention a slew of very good second-tier films and one-offs, such as "Oedipus Wrecks," the only true gem in the anthology film New York Stories.

It would be easy to blast back with some omissions; for example, Francis Ford Coppola's one outstanding film (of four consecutive outstanding films) is only a few thousand times better than Rafelson's. However, Biskind's game does not come with instructions, so I am a little confused about the general rules. I guess the "Reputation" part confuses me, because if I am to take the whole thing literally, that would mean these are not necessarily great directors--they just have that reputation on the basis of at least one outstanding film.

In fact, I thought for a moment he left out Coppola because none of the directors he names are great directors. Until he gets to Truffaut, that is, who is a great director despite Biskind's instant-classic caveat that he directed "only three masterpieces." So perhaps instead of playing How Few Outstanding Films..., we should try a new game called What the Fuck Is Peter Biskind Saying?

a) Look at all these hacks compared to Woody Allen.
b) There are no great directors, only "auteurs" and outstanding films.
c) It takes "only three masterpieces, all early in (your) career" to make you overrated.
d) Woody Allen's 10 outstanding films legitimize his greatness in a way that the other directors' few outstanding films cannot.
e) All of the above.

Or maybe none of the above, although I cannot tilt my head that far or squint enough to see another alternative. However, that is why I have my readers, who I am hoping will be able to help me either see the forest for the trees or just clear-cut the forest so it makes more sense. I need you!



Comments

I'm just confused why Bob Rafelson's name is there in the first place. That seems to be throwing the whole thing out of whack. Why him?

I think he's essentially saying that Allen came up during a period where the director reigned supreme, and lots of them got a reputation as being "great," but Allen truly deserves this reputation, because he has produced more "oustanding films" than all the others. That's my take on it. But get Rafelson the fuck off that list.


Robert Altman ISN'T a great director?


You better make a case for Altman not being on that list.


Mr. Biskind is not noted for his critical acumen, as his well-paid books amply demonstrate.


Peter Biskind is the Kitty Kelley of Film. Bob Rafelson is a hack. Lee Tamahori made one great film too. Francis Ford Coppola is a quitter. Woody Allen is the most influential comedian of the last 30 years. Peter Biskind's moustache makes him look like something out of R. Crumb. Robert Altman also made The Long Goodbye. William Friedkin is underrated. Peter Bogdonavich hates Hugh Hefner. James Caan doesn't. Peter Biskind has never seen a Stanley Kubrick film. Peter Watkins beats them all.


Peter Biskind used to date my mom. This was back in '77. After she split from Ken Norton. Peter was a big fan of Loggins and Messina. When he made love to my mother he would make sure that every candle in the house was lit. Then he would scooch her down to the foot of the bed. I'm not kidding. They were loud. We lived in one of those plywood condos on Beverly Glen. Peter and my mom made the whole place shake. I couldn't sleep so I would watch television and let me tell you that nothing is scarier to a five year old than watcing the preview for Magic while Peter Biskind is going to town on your mother. Peter was the one who took me to see The Apple Dumpling Gang. We sat in the middle and he ate from a bag of Mother's Animal Cookies. I tried to ask him a question during the middle of the movie and he told me to shut the f*&% up. That doesn't mean I don't have pleasant memories of Peter. Because I do. Like the time he took me to Knott's Berry Farm. I remember eating ate the fried chicken restaurant and how bits of mashed potato clung to Peter's moustache. He ate like five or six biscuits and couldn't stop talking about that scene from Altman's A Wedding, the one were Desi Jr and that other guy take a shower together. He said it made him upset. I didn't ask him why it made him upset but he told me anyway. He said that it was disturbing to see a man wear his underwear in the shower.


It's a skewed and stupid list, based on an ungenerous assessment of a handful of directors, and an overly generous one of Allen. Biskind doesn't include Thieves Like Us, The Long Goodbye, Vincent and Theo or Short Cuts on Altman's list, and doesn't mention, as noted, Coppola, or Scorsese ( Mean Streets, Raging Bull, GoodFellas) or David Lynch (The Elephant Man, Blue Velvet Mulholland Drive) or Spielberg (Schindler's List) or DePalma (Carrie, The Fury, Blow Out, Dressed to Kill, Casualties of War.)

One may like or dislike any of these movies, but for heaven's sake don't tell me Broadway Danny Rose or Bullets Over Broadway is their equal.


ok, so iv read all your rants; fuck biskind he sounds like an idiot. more importantly Woody Allen is undoubtedly an influential figure in the film world, bloody brilliant films; but is he an auteur and does the auteur theory actually exist? i believe the auteur theory has too small a base to stand conclusive and i believe this should be the debatable.



Trackbacks

Reeler > Woody Allen, 'Defector' - My westward journey also allowed me the opportunity to find the good film news way in the back of this week's issue of New York Magazine--it is not all NYU film school implosions and Ken Tucker going out with... (12/22/05)