I'm really out of badges? I want to badge this because it is a goddamn good essay; it doesn't answer the question, but relates and examines something personal in a very effective way. The question of "What do we do with the art of monstrous men?" is not only a question about them or their art. It's a question about me, it's a question about you. I also love how she used it as an opportunity to consider our own monstrosities and their requirement for creation. We are melancholy-cool with self harm through drug abuse, and wonder on the contribution of that monster. Successful asshole predators are falling like trees atm, and I'm not sure if I find comfort in or abhor the idea that there is some sort of correlation. Is normal humanity less predatory by nature? Probably not. :( Is there a phenotype that is associated with success? Probably. :( Edit: Thanks, kantos!
Agreed. Great essay. Thanks to kantos also. Is there a phenotype associated with success? Maybe. My guess as a middle school teacher, I study and work at modifying human behavior daily, is that these monsters were rewarded along the way for their talent while the world around them turned a blind eye in respect to their talents. Like a toddler that eventually learns to ignore their baser behaviors. Say throwing a tantrum over a dislike for his/her current meal, these predators have not learned that their behaviors are reprehensible. Because of their power, people turned a blind eye long enough and the behavior persisted and grew to the freakish level that got them caught, Matt Lauer’s supposed under-desk door locking button, or to a level that allows them to silently still get along with it. In my experience, I’ve got to believe that the system around these monster men is also to blame for allowing them to become the dirt bags they are.
No problem. :) Edit: Worth it. Haven't read any commentary on Allen since I had a mini-marathon of his works this summer, notably Annie Hall, Manhattan, Crimes and Misdemeanors, and Match Point. Among other things, the author got to the root of what makes them connect to the viewer. A bit tangential, but This alongside neurosis were ever-present in his themes. Frankly, each year he "puts out" a movie seems like he's attempting the same underlying story, polishing the narrative bit-by-bit.The grown women in Manhattan are brittle and all too aware of death; they’re aware of every goddamn thing. A thinking woman is stuck—distanced from the body, from beauty, from life itself.
Hey, so what is it that appeals to you about his movies? And can I ask if you fall in the "20-30" age range or the "30-45"? I feel a disconnect to his films but I also feel they are marked by their era. I'm wondering if that is part of it. (Also, I just don't really buy the 'hey look at me, i'm a lovable harmless smuck, but I can be funny' bit of it. I saw Ghostbusters before any Woody Allen film so Allen has the unique perspective, in my eyes, of simply reminding me of Rick Moranis.)
Small bit of context before how they appeal to me will give a bit more insight. Over summers I tend to spend quality time with senior relative of mine in exchange for taking care of his grandchildren when he's no longer around. This past summer is when I marathoned them with him as a part of my 'education'. Through these movies I found many nuggets of where his "-ism's" came from. In some cases, I realized verbatim his life advice matched the script of a couple scenes in some instances (e.g. Tracy's description of what one can define love? I think. The "Your concerns are my concerns, we make each laugh, and we we have great sex."). Did realizing this color view both the movie, Woody, and my relative differently? Marginally. I mean, I would like to think thats not bad general advice for a relationship, and it's not like I already have role models for flourishing, lasting relationships/marriages (his being one of them). So, aside from being on the younger end of my 20s, learning what I can from a man I love and respect dearly to pass on for his grandchildren to learn... This summer and the better part of last spring I had been "staring into the void" after a friend's suicide, and Woody's weirdly frank humor on the subject of nihilism/neurosis was something that took such shitty thoughts and took them out of me into literally the big screen (at some point). I found Woody's quirks leaning towards nihilism with occasional chimes on/at a we were both born into all the more relatable than movies I'm accustom. With that, I can't say I agree with the function of relationships and, specifically, the nature and development of dynamics between the main characters in his works, period. But... as far as I'm concerned, these are merely means of Woody transmuting his life experience into an essence he's familiar with over the course of several movies - at least the ones I was presented with. I thoroughly enjoyed seeing his progression from something as coarse as Annie Hall to a more refined Match Point in so far as production, at minimum. Edit: a lot of minor formatting and syntax corrections made.
There's an apocryphal, unsourced statistic that 95% of the audience of any given Woody Allen film lives on Manhattan Island. At ten bucks a head and a population of 2 million people, that's a gross of $20m - literally every film except Hannah and her Sisters, Manhattan, Annie Hall and Sleeper. And Antz. Yeah. I forgot about that, too. Nobody watches Woody Allen films. We're all required to be aware of them because New York film critics watch Woody Allen films but the average Andrew Niccol film does fifty times the business of the average Woody Allen film and you don't even know who Andrew Niccol is. If you didn't spend multiple years within sight of the Twin Towers, Woody Allen has nothing to say to you.