mcsawley

23 May 2012

Misdeamanor, surely

The casting is excellent both for the main actors and for thesupporting role. Chris Wilton almost never smiles, thorn and dramaticfigure. He discovers that he has a dark side of this personality whichruins the unbelievable luck that his other personality attracts. NolaRice puts a brave face on the fact that she inspires only lust and notlove, until she cannot take it any longer. This a film aboutdiscovering who you really are. As in Dostoievsky's story, and becausehe escapes justice from the humans, whatever he does, Wilton knows henever find any peace: this is the worst of the punishment because heunderstands he will be confronted with what he did every day of hislife on earth, and beyond.

jcolesw2

23 May 2012

Worst filim ever

I was on a long haul flight and flicking through the channels on the inflight entertainment, came across this film. As a Scot living in LondonI was initially captivated by the London element of the film and thatelement alone got me watching, I watched the last hour or so and thenwent back and watched the whole film again.What grabbed me, other than a residents view of London and trying torecognise locations, was the undoubted thought that it was without adoubt the worst film I have ever seen and sat through,it badness keptme watching kept me intrigued: acting, in this film I thing not,script...bad bad bad bad.This film was made by someone who watched Bridehead Revisited andthinks that is how England still is, or more especially London.Its not.The main actor delivered the worst performance I have ever witnessed. Ionce read that K Hepburn was described as delivering every emotion"from a to b", well JRM does not get to B and "a" is only explored withthe minimum of effort, I think JRM (main actor) delivered his lines asthough he was sitting on the loo reading them to himself; its a lovelywhimsy of what London and Britain might be like to some people, but"Pappa" does not get you jobs or wealth in London any more.It is a dreadful film, dreadful acting, they all must have been needingcash very badly. The plot is nonsense the whole this is utterly crass JRK may look good, and, he does< but hisacting ability is zero if one goes by this fim,Its captivating to watch from the magnitude of it awfulness, butwithout doubt, thbe worst film I have ever watched, and I've seen somehowlers...

headhunter46

23 May 2012

Well filmed, well acted, but disturbing in its conclusion

Even though it was very well acted, expertly filmed, and professionallydirected, about 2/3 of the way through the film I began to detest themain character. He is selfish, deceitful and betrays people who lovehim. He ends up abusing some people he should have loved and sometotally innocent people as well. He cares only for himself and thebenefits he can gain from his relationship with others. This film leftme with a terrible, empty feeling. The ending was depressing, notpleasant at all. In fact it was very disturbing. Call me old fashionedbut I prefer movies where those who do evil get their just reward. Thereal villain in this movie doesn't get punished for his/her misdeeds.

rob-1185

22 May 2012

Seriously bad

I love Woody Allen, so I write this review as a pained fan. I just sawa special screening in London of Match Point, and sad to say, it's theworst film I have seen in a long long time.The dialogue is terrible. It's unconvincing, hackneyed and laughable(not in a good way). The use of London is pointless, except to useshots of Tate Modern and a couple of red buses and other clichés. IfWoody actually thinks people in London live and talk like this, he issadly mistaken.The film drags. It's about 30 minutes too long, and has anexceptionally boring plot. There is nothing to recommend this film,except for a few nice supporting characters and lusting after ScarlettJohansson, whose performance is acceptable enough.Avoid.

fish_stix03

19 May 2012

Allen shows us his darker, subtler side

Match Point is a film that isn't about the blurriness of right andwrong, but is about the struggle between various degrees of evil tocome out on top. As the film reminds us countless times, it's astruggle that doesn't rely on skill or guile, but luck. This film is apleasant return to form for Woody Allen, after his last fifteen yearsof churning out insipid comedies that aren't indicative of his enormoustalent.The first thing I should say about this film is that it isunrecognisable as a Woody Allen film. It's not a comedy (although thereare one or two Woody-style laughs), he's not in it romancing ScarletJohansson (thankfully), and it's set in London instead of Manhattan.For those of you out there who generally don't like Woody Allen (and asmuch as I love and respect the little guy, I know his style doesn'tclick with everyone), I think you'll be pleasantly surprised with thisfilm. It's not full of the whimsical humour and confidence (many wouldsay, borderline arrogance) of his comedies, but instead is imbued witha sense of darkness and tragedy that we haven't seen from him in a verylong time.Jonathan Rhys-Meyers puts in the best performance I've seen from him asChris Wilton, a former tennis pro who meets Tom (Matthew Goode) andkind of falls for his sister Chloe (Emily Mortimer). I say "kind offalls for her" because as the film unfurls, it becomes clear that he'safter a higher status, is willing to do anything for it, and almosteverything that he does is questionable. Chloe's father (Brian Cox) isextremely wealthy and offers Chris a job as an executive at one of hiscompanies. Chris meets Tom's fiancée, Nola (Scarlet Johansson), anAmerican wannabe actress who is also seeking a marriage into wealth andstatus. Tom's parents don't approve of her as much as they do of Chris,which is made clear during a conversation she has with Tom's mother(Penelope Wilton) regarding her acting 'career'. Unfortunately for Chris and Nola, they are more attracted to each otherthan the lifestyles they are trying to acquire. Now, Chris is tornbetween greed and lust, and the way he handles this situation is wherethe true genius of the film lies. Unfortunately, I can't reveal toomuch more of the story without spoiling any surprises, but trust me inthat aside from being one of Allen's best character pieces, it is alsoan incredibly effective psychological thriller. I think much of thefilm's success has to do with Chris's feeling of fear. He's afraid thathe'll lose the lifestyle he wants so badly, but is also afraid thatNola will cause his downfall if he doesn't keep her happy. He wants tosatisfy both his greed and his lust, and is too selfish to let one ofthe two go. Oh, what to do, what to do? You'll find out.Scarlet Johansson is ridiculously sexy in this film. I suppose she hasto be in order to make it believable that she would seduce Chris tosuch an extent that he would consider losing everything to have her.Rhys-Meyers and Johansson have incredible chemistry that makes the filmimpossible not to become engrossed in. The sex scenes (and theycertainly are sex scenes rather than love scenes) are incrediblyraunchy, despite the fact that there is no nudity and the most we seeof either of them is Rhys-Meyers' chest and Johansson's bra.A lot of this film's second half is a modern re-telling of a certainnovel by a certain Russian novelist (I won't tell you which book orwhich author in order to preserve the twists, but there is a hint ofwhat it is early in the film). Match Point is Allen's finest film sinceBullets over Broadway and I'd like to think that the reason his twelvefilms in between are so comparatively poor is because he was buildingup the courage to make this masterpiece, which is an opera in movieform. Upon further thought, I think I'm wrong. I think Match Point hasbeen a film Allen's been torturing over and writing in his head sincethe beginning of his career, and I'd go so far as to say it's one ofhis top two or three best films.

buff-29

19 May 2012

Stilted dialog, contrived plot

How can this movie have gotten so much praise? British reviewers havenot been especially kind, but on this side of the Atlantic thecompliments have been tossed around quite recklessly. It is always funto watch Scarlett Johansonn, but there is not a lot of otherentertainment offered in this very long movie. The opening is handledwell enough and the first hour of the film passes without causing unduepain. But then: oh my heavens. Characters drift in and out ofcharacter, and the plot becomes one contrivance built on another onanother. By the time the end rolls round, one has been checking one'swatch every 5 minutes for what seems like hours. Woody Allen may stillhave some movies in him; I just hope that he keeps them, if the restare as sorry as this.

17 May 2012

I have read this before...

While watched the movie could not escape the thought that once before the sequence of the same events was captured by Theodore Dreiser in "An American Tragedy"

drakejake

16 May 2012

Only Caruso Provides Passion in Pointless Match Point

I just returned from a disappointing viewing of the new Woody Allenmovie Match Point, said to be "his best film in years." If this istrue, I have not been missing much. I am actually a big fan of Woody'sbest work, such as Broadway Danny Rose, Manhattan, and A MidsummerNight's Sex Comedy, but in Match Point Allen reveals that he hasnothing to say and nothing to do but pile cliché upon cliché in apitifully poor script and do laughable imitations of countless dopeydomestic melodramas from past decades. Most of the movie gives us ameaningless triangle of man, wife, and lust-mate, the horribly stalestory of a man whose work is hurt by his romantic infidelities, and anafterthought of callous murders and an O'Henry final twist that wouldhardly be enough to justify a short, short, short story.Naturally I loved the gorgeous singing of the young Caruso (obviously acynical pandering to the vast number of people who like scratchyrecords) and was intrigued to learn what lyric tenor was trying to singOtello (Lotric?). I guess the budget forced the director to haveoperatic scenes at Covent Garden performed to piano accompanimentrather than with orchestra. Woody casts very beautiful people, lights them flatteringly, and givesthem endless super closeups. Woody loves the cloudy London weather andsupplies lots of beautiful scenery, inside houses and in thecountryside. But the script is so poor that the photogenic actors--mostof whom possessing very limited talent--cannot help being trite andeven ridiculous. The very lovely Scarlett Johansson is given thephoniest lines in the most hackneyed situations and cannot rise abovethe tripe of the script.Go for the music and the pretty pictures, but don't expect anythingnew, clever, or worthwhile from the script.

14 May 2012

MATCH AND POINT TAKEN

I WAS LOANED THIS FILM AND KNOWING ALL OF WOODY ALLEN'S MOVIES DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT WHEN I HEARD PREVIEWS ON HOW DIFFERENT THIS IS .FIRST ..I DID ENJOY IT .I FOUND MYSELF ALMOST FROM THE FIRST, WHEN CRIS HAD THE HOTS FOR NOLA THAT I KNEW SHE'D END UP ...WELL I WON'T TELL YOU THAT ...SPOIL IT .BUT, THIS IS TOO CLOSE TO AN OLD FILM FROM 1951 TITLED .." A PLACE IN THE SUN " W/ ELIZABETH TAYLOR, SHELLEY WINTERS, AND MONTGOMERY CLIFT .I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF MR. ALLEN ( who loves old movies by the way )DIDN'T DO A BIT OF PLAGERISM BUT, WITH HIS GENEOUS COVERS IT WELL , ESPECIALLY FOR FOLKS WHO HADN'T SEEN " PLACE IN THE SUN " .WELL, ALL YOU PEOPLE WHO REFUSE TO EITHER WATCH ANY MOVIE OLDER THEN 2 YEARS OLD OR NEVER, EVER WATCH A B/W FILM THENYOU DIDN'T SEE IT , TO YOU I SAY ...VIEW THIS .MICHAEL DOUGLAS & GWENYTH PALTRO DID THE SAME SORT OF RE-DO WHEN THEY COPIED " DIAL M FOR MURDER " IN A PERFECT MURDER.AGAIN THO ...RENT IT OR BORROW IT ...NOT WORTH BUYING BUT, FUN TO SEE ONCE .

essex9999

13 May 2012

Dull, Prententious ... Classic Latter-Day Woody Allen

First of all, I'm sick of WA's obsession with upper-class people andthe life he thinks they should lead. As is typical in his movies, thecharacters in MP exist in some weird never-never land untouched bypopular culture. Here we have a group of 4 affluent urban people intheir 20's, but none of them ever go to a club, watch a football match,listen to music less than 100 years old or, apparently, watchtelevision or go to movies that aren't French. Even the bars andrestaurants they frequent are stuffy rather than trendy and modern.It's not that I disdain high culture or particularly love modern popculture or trendiness - often the reverse; but, c'mon on, nobody under50 nowadays leads this rarified a life, let alone a group of young,wealthy, pretty Londoners. It makes the characters less believable andless sympathetic to portray them as being so remote from the culturaluniverse the rest of us inhabit.Secondly, Chris' character is flat and uninteresting because we don'tknow about enough about him to understand or care about his motives. Ifhe was a poor boy, how did he come by the posh accent? (If that isindeed a posh accent; JRM's mode of speech was so stilted it was hardto tell.) Is it put on? Has he always been a climber, aiming to marry arich girl, or did he just happen to fall into the company of these richpeople and like what he found? Who cares? If WA was trying a make apoint or build a story around class differences, he failed - there isnot enough conflict and contract between the characters to work on thatlevel.Overall, although Match Point was pretty look at, by the last half-hourI was peering at my watch, anxious to get out.

Betty Jo Tucker

13 May 2012

A movie with no heart or soul.

12 May 2012

3.5 stars out of 4

The Bottom Line:One of the best movies Allen has ever made, Match Point is a fascinating character piece that changes almost imperceptibly into a first-rate thriller; a movie that can be viewed over and over, it's worth watching and owning.

Emanuel Levy

12 May 2012

Changing locale and genre prove invigorating for Allen, whose London morality tale is inspired by Dostoevsky's seminal novel and mixes elements of his 1989 Crimes & Misdemeanors and such classics as A Place in the Sun and A Room at the Top.

11 May 2012

The Old Master gives us a Beauty

Although similar to Allen's Crimes and Mesdemeanors, (1989) Match Point differs in many significant areas, including the ruthless social climbing of the protagonist, Chris Wilton, (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) as he moves into London's wealthy class. Meyers gave a compelling and strong performance as Chris Wilton reminding me of the literary character, Tom Ripley, who similarly pushes his way up the social ladder using anything at his disposal to attain what he wants, including murder. Ripley has often been characterized as the likable sociopath and villain, however, there's really nothing to like about Wilton, finding myself throughout the viewing wanting him to stumble and be discovered as the fraud he truly is. Wilton is handsome and charming, subtlety seducing Chloe Hewitt (Emily Mortimer) the daughter of a wealthy business man, Alec Hewitt (Brian Cox) eventually wriggles into their world of class and privilege.Nola Rice (Scarlett Johansson) is a mid-western girl trying to become an actress in London. Rice meets the Hewitt son Tom, (Matthew Goode) and becomes his fiancé. Johansson's performance is right on the mark, a sultry and beautiful femme fatale, whose sexual magnetism pulls the now married Chris Wilton into a lurid and obsessive affair. The scenes between Johansson and Meyers are performed extremely well as one can at times fill the heat come off the screen. Unfortunately it has been stated in other reviews that Allen is out of his comfort zone in London making this picture and this is reflected in the production - I couldn't disagree more as Remi Adefarasin's cinematography is at times brilliant, capturing many beautiful areas of London. This film was indeed creatively and professionally shot.Woody Allen's screenplay, well, particularly the dialogue, is absolutely shining with wit and depth. In fact it is the dialogue the carries the film along. After a slew of average films, (for Woody Allen) Match Point stands out as and can stand with, his other master pieces such as Hannah and her Sisters, Crimes and Mesdemeanors, Annie Hall and The Purple Rose of Cairo.As a Woody Allen fan for many years, I've followed his career through its ups and downs, and Match Point clearly demonstrates that the old master continues to have what it takes to create a great film.

fedor8

07 May 2012

Might Soon Yi be jealous?

Allen's little atheistic one-liners and musings were always a nicechange from the religious baloney we get in other movies. MP's basicpoint isn't a theme as trite as fidelity (as some people here seem tothink) but the factor of luck that dominates everyone's life from theword go. Meyers got away with murder merely because the ring didn'tfall into the Thames river. Sure, it's a bit fortune-cookie-ish, the"grand" way in which this startling new philosophical revelation waspresented, i.e. it can't be anything new to anyone above the age of 12(excepting morons), but it gave Allen an opportunity to make a dulldrama once again (after "Interiors"). As we know, all comedians aremiserable bastards who strive to be taken seriously, which they allseem to think can only be achieved through the channeling of theirenergy into drama. How stupid. Or perhaps writing a drama is mucheasier than coming up with something funny. Well, no "perhaps" aboutit.A romantic drama, no less, for at least 90 minutes of this over-long2-hour movie. What was he thinking? MP has the plot of a typicalmovie-of-the-week man-cheats-wife-and-it-all-ends-in-murder TV drama,only with marginally better acting and dialogue. Meyers is a poor boywho's made his way through tennis, he gets into a very rich family, hegets fatally attracted to his future brother-in-law's fiancée, thingsstart getting complicated etc... Most of the movie is Meyers lying tohis wife or having sex with Johansson, all of this interspersed withsurprisingly stilted dialogue which reveals Allen's inability to writefor straight characters. And let's not forget all the coincidences...The theme of luck serves as a very convenient excuse for all the cheapplot-devices that had characters bumping into one another in thestreets of London, which isn't exactly a small Welsh mining town.Clever, Woody, clever. Nevertheless, whether you have an excuse for itor not, it's always lazy and unoriginal writing to employ suchclichés/tricks.But forget luck. Now we come to the REAL purpose behind this movie:let's face it, MP was written and made as a simple excuse for Woody tofilm his latest female obsession - Scarlett Johansson - having sexscenes. ("Artistic muse", my a**...) Many directors have tried thissort of thing, and some even got lucky by hooking up with the starbimbo. Of course, Woody is far too old and funny-looking (trying to bediplomatic here) for Scarlett to help turn his burning-desire/fantasyinto reality. They'll never become a couple, but God knows WA will betrying for years to come... ("Scarlett, honey, I have a new movie foryou. Will you please play a starving, nymphomaniac hooker?" "Of course,I will, Woody. You know that it's, like, always a huge honour to workwith an artist like you, and stuff!") Draw your own conclusions as towhat Woody was doing in his trailer on the days when the sex sceneswith Scarlett were being shot (no pun intended)... (Damn, Hollywood isfull of dysfunctional morons...)Intentional or not, MP reveals the full extent of WA's decadence andlack of morality. The theme of casually cheating on your partner withyour best friend's wife/husband is nothing new to Woody. ("Husbands &Wives", as just one example.) He always presents it as something thatisn't so bad. In fact, he even makes the cheaters likable. No wonder.After all, this is the man who MARRIED HIS DAUGHTER, lest we forget.Woody Allen the private person has absolutely no scruples whatsoever,hence his relatively sympathetic portrayal of two selfish adulterers,Johansson and Meyers, is not a surprise.The casting is problematic too. Meyers, who appears in just about everyscene, simply isn't capable of carrying a 2-hour movie. He has thecharisma of a fish. Besides, we never quite understand what exactlyattracts the "wild" Scarlett to him; he is like a lifeless android,always dull and polite. It was also predictable that the ghosts ofMeyers' victims would appear at some point. Allen's fanatical devotionto the Swedish charlatan, critics' darling, and gloom-and-doomsuicidario, Ingmar Bergman, is on record... Check out the poster forMP: there's a hint of Bergmanesqueness there. So blatant, so shameless.Thank God the tennis scenes were sparse. If I had been forced to watchthe very unathletic Meyers hit those lousy ground strokes anotherminute more, I'd have freaked out. Isn't there a single male actor outthere who can play just one shot properly? Pathetic. You can't show anaverage player hit his mediocre shots, and then expect to have usbelieve that he almost became a pro...

Kenneth Anderson

07 May 2012

Crimes and Misdemeanors 2005

*This Comment is ALL spoilers*Have you ever caught someone doing something unethical, say, stealingsomething small from a workplace; they rationalize their motives toyou, you let it pass, but every time they see you they feel the need tokeep re-convincing you that what they did was OK? Well that's what it'sbeen like watching Woody Allen movies lately. Ever since the Soon-Yithing, Allen keeps making one film after another in which the point isstressed that morality is subjective (if it exists at all) and thatthere is no punishment or justice for the wicked, merely randomness andthe healing blanket of time."Match Point" is merely "Crimes and Misdemeanors" with exclamationpoints and one wonders why Mr. Allen is shouting so loud and so often.Given the brittle framework both films are built upon (We HAVE tobelieve that no other options are available to the protagonists), onesenses that perhaps he doesn't buy into the cold cynicism any more thanI do.Why make essentially the exact same film if one doesn't have anythingnew to add? As I was watching "Match Point" I was aware that I had beendown this road before, but what kept my interest was my certainty thatsurely a new locale, a younger cast and the passing of 15 years (not tomention a director who had waded through his own ethical quagmire)would bring me to a new place at the conclusion. Not exactly. Thebiggest twist ending this film had for me was that there was NO twistending! It was the same pseudo-philosophical clap-trap he'd fed usbefore (only better). Why didn't he just name it "Crimes andMisdemeanors 2005" and be done with it? A couple of complaints: 1) I know that women get fooled by bad liarsevery day of the week, and judging by the throngs populating daytimetalk shows, many are knocked up and abandoned by them as well. However,the women in this film are written as such dolts! She – "Are you havingan affair?" He- "No, of course not!" Well, that settles that! Everytime a man is accused of cheating he will break down and tell the truthwhen asked point blank. No need to trust your instincts or use yourbrain, just go exclusively by what your sweaty, pale and shifty-eyedhusband is saying.2) A thriller that relies on deception fails to be very engrossingwhen, in order for it to progress, EVERYBODY in sight has to be aneasily duped fool. If the rich were this unsuspicious of the poor, thenevery pool boy, personal trainer and yoga instructor in Los Angeleswould… never mind.Only rave: The film was beautifully shot and Scarlett Johansson wasbetter than the film deserved.

06 May 2012

Matchless

Over the years, there have been a limited number of movies that left me stunned: not in the sense of being shocked but in the sense of being overwhelmed by a powerful message. It's a solid clue that the movie you just saw was some sort of a masterpiece. I had known ahead of time that Woody Allen was very pleased with how "Match Point" had turned out even to the point of suggesting that it was his greatest movie. As a fan of Allen's movies, I took that as quite a recommendation. However, I had no other advance information about the movie except that it involved tennis.I won't attempt to try and spell out the plot because I enjoyed the movie as much as I did by not having any preconceptions. However, it is a morality play that examines the role of fate (luck) in our lives. As the movies unfolds and the characters develop, we find ourselves getting involved with the "hero". We agonize over his decisions and his behavior primarily because the director enabled us to know him so well. If, at times, the movie seems to creep along, it is because Allen knows how to properly set the stage. When things do happen quickly, everything we've learned comes into play and we are rewarded for our attentiveness. This is a movie where you find yourself knowing what you'd do in the same situation but agonizing over what the main character will do. A mistake born of passion grows out of control. Where will it end. Where DID it end? "Match Point" is a movie for those who want to be drawn into a dramatic look at the casualties of our passions. It reminded me of Allen's "Crimes and Misdemeanors" but even better.

Chris_Docker

06 May 2012

Effortless direction

Something of a turning point in the career of the director perhaps.After being ignored in his home country for many years, this new filmby Woody Allen is already (on release in Britain) nominated at theGolden Globes for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay and BestActress (Scarlett Johansson).It's a big change for Allen. Gone is the familiar Manhattan skyline,Allan doesn't appear once, there are none of his stuttering lines, NYis exchanged for London's South Bank, and the even the comedy is verybetween the lines, with nods to Dostoevsky and La Traviata.Jonathan Rhys-Meyers plays an ex tennis star now making a living as acoach at an exclusive club. There he becomes friends with wealthysocialite Tom and ends up marrying Tom's sister (played by the lovelyEmily Mortimer). Except he has become smitten with Tom's fiancé, playedby Scarlett Johansson, a failing American actress. Helped into theEnglish upper classes, he is loathe to relinquish his lifestyle, evenwhen he becomes bored with his wife. This is comedy in theShakespearean sense, the whole story revolving around the importance ofluck, yet it soon escalates into equally compelling tragedy.There are few recognisable Woody Allen characteristics - possibly theauthor's detachment from his subject matter - and he makes the mistakeof letting one of the characters call her father 'Papa' (which I doubtif anyone in the English upper classes does these days) - but it doesnot quite descend to the out-and-out thriller we might have anticipatedfrom the trailer. It retains its aloofness to become a meditation onthe importance luck plays in the lives of everyone and whether it ismore important to be 'lucky' than 'good.' The sexual eroticism -between Jonathan Rhys-Meyers and Scarlett Johansson (who turns in yetanother outstanding performance)- is unusual for Allen but, like theensuing violence, is never allowed to detract from the cerebralcontent. It's a thought provoking study, but the question it poses isnot exactly earth shattering.

chilindrina2002

06 May 2012

A good surprise

If you're going to see this movie expecting the story of a neuroticcharacter and lots of laughs, you'll be disappointed. Match Point isWoody Allen trying something different with a great plot and script anda wonderful casting.I'm biased, OK. I've been a Woody Allen fan for years, although Ihaven't liked all his movies. In his late films I was missing the moodI loved about Crimes and Misdemeanors or Husbands and Wives, and MatchPoint recovers it in some way, even though it's a completely differentmovie.Another difference is the location. It felt strange to see an Allenmovie where characters don't walk in Manhattan coming or going to adiner. Since I'm not British I can't tell if locations are good, but itsure looked very British high society to me. I mean, if it is cloudyand rainy 90% of the time and people play tennis and speak English witha strong British accent, where are you? And finally i'd like to mentionhow good actors are in this movie. Jonathan Rhys-Meyers and ScarlettJohansson have a intensity that fills the screen. I'm glad to see thatnot all the raising good actors are talentless Hollywood stars. There'shope for cinema.

Krystyna

05 May 2012

Riveting, intense, one of the years best!

What begins as a slightly plodding morality play takes a dark turn midway through, as Match Point's Jonathan Rhys-Meyers (Chris) social climbs his way up the ladder at dad-in-law's company. Well directed and mostly underacted, Match Point takes us through emotional twists and turns till its very surprising conclusion. Scarlett Johannson is excellent as an intensely sensual actress wannabe; an Oscar nomination is a probability. Some may find her histrionics a bit over-the-top but they were essential to the character.All in all, Woody Allen does a wonderful job of writing and directing a modern day Austen-like story. Easily his best since Annie Hall.