Artsculture

Love? Are You Kidding?

What does Woody Allen really know about the human heart?

By Dorothy Woodend, 29 Aug 2008, TheTyee.ca

Penelope Cruz, Woody Allen, of Vicky Christina Barcelona

Cruz, Allen, Hall of 'Vicky Christina Barcelona.'

Text size:

Rate this:

Login/Register

Woody Allen's latest film came out a few weeks ago, and I've been thinking about it ever since I saw it. This is unusual. Mr. Allen's recent output has been less than thrilling, and while Vicky Cristina Barcelona isn't entirely a return to form, it is interesting enough to stick in one's brain. In the middle of the silly summer, that's about the best you can hope for.

Vicky Christina Barcelona is Allen's 44th film, and the first to be set in Spain. Given that Woody Allen is now in his elder statesman years, past peccadilloes (stepdaughter lovers and 17-year-old high school girls) appear to be forgiven. Allen is free then to make lofty statements about the waywardness of human nature, which is precisely what he does here, through the young bodies and minds of the film's titular heroines.

Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and Cristina (Scarlett Johansson) are two friends in their mid-20s spending a summer in Spain. Vicky is working on her Master's degree in Catalan culture, and Cristina is merely on the run from boredom. Little do they know, but they're about to embark on a heroines' journey, complete with an entry into an underworld of sun, sex and sensual delights, embodied in the fine form of Javier Bardem. Along the way, both women will be tested, their principles and their moral philosophies found wanting.

The pair are perfect archetypes. Vicky, in traditional brunette fashion, is overly reasoned, rigid and controlling and about to be married to a Brooks Brothers stick-in-the-mud. She is more in love with the idea of marriage and commitment than she is with her actual husband-to-be. Cristina, a gossamer blond, is a failed artist, wildly casting about for something that will satisfy her restless spirit. She doesn't know what she wants, only that she does not want what Vicky has, namely commitment, marriage, all the components of a settled life. A helpful narrator provides us with all this pertinent information in the opening moments of the story, so we're primed and ready when the girls arrive in the balmy climes of Barcelona.

Older, wiser?

Vicky and Christina are being put up by family friends, an older couple named Mark and Judy Nash, played by Kevin Dunn and Patricia Clarkson (shamelessly channelling those old Woody-isms). The Nashes appear to have weathered the squalls of romantic entanglement, but then appearances can be terribly deceiving. The two girls tour the city and before long make the acquaintance of one Juan Antonio, played by the very luscious Javier Bardem. A quick aside: the first time I saw Javier Bardem was in Bigas Luna's Jamón, jamón, where he starred with a 17-year-old Penelope Cruz. At the time, Mr. Bardem didn't quite look real, or more correctly, he looked too good to be real. The man has aged like a side of fine ham.

Juan Antonio is an artist with a mysterious past, which includes a wife who tried to kill him. Sensible Vicky is appalled, but Cristina has the opposite reaction, and when the painter propositions them with an invitation to go away for the weekend, drink good wine, eat good food and make love, Cristina leaps at the chance. Vicky is dragged along to chaperone and into the belly of the beast go the young lovelies.

The fading beauty of Spain makes an ideal backdrop for seduction, and even as these young women are dropping their inhibitions like so many Salome's scarves, so too, the audience is being beguiled with rugged Spaniards and the pillowy softness of warm summer nights. We want this trio to get together, and before long, that's exactly what happens. When an ulcer flare-up puts Cristina out of commission, Juan Antonio and Vicky tour about, visit his aging father, drink a little too much wine, listen to too much guitar music, and hey presto! A moment of romantic heat explodes, as the camera tiptoes discreetly away.

From there things get more infinitely more complicated.

Deciphering love notes

Love is never simple, especially in a Woody Allen movie, but here the twists and turns are positively dizzying. Vicky in an agony of remorse pretends nothing has happened, and Juan Antonio and Cristina finally hit the sack. Meanwhile, Vicky's future husband has arrived, wanting to get married in Barcelona. But having tasted the tang of Spanish passion, Vicky is reluctant to go back to white bread. And then Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz), Juan Antonio's homicidal/suicidal ex-wife, reenters the picture. Soon enough, everyone is grappling with escalating levels of romantic complexity, and no one appears to be having much success.

In fact, no body is satisfied. While Vicky desperately pines for Juan Antonio, Judy Nash (herself engaged in a deathless marriage) tries to save Vicky from her own fate. Cristina, having engaged openly with polyamory (a three-way relationship), isn't content. Her old restlessness having resurfaced, she leaves behind Juan Antonio and Maria Elena. Without her balancing element, they quickly revert to their old ways, and end up fighting in the street. Love in whatever incarnation -- boring and safe, experimental and new, violent and passionate -- apparently does not work.

So, what exactly do we, the audience, take away from this tangled web?

That no one is ever truly happy for long? That love will always disappoint you? That desire is a death drive, and ought to be avoided? That our nature as human beings is to squirm, bob and weave, and perpetually struggle after something that is, in fact, unattainable?

And, since Woody Allen's' entire film career has been largely preoccupied with these questions, has he actually figured anything out?

Why are we surprised?

The person whose philosophy seems the most reasoned in Vicky Cristina Barcelona is Juan Antonio, who simply says that life is nasty, brutish and short, so one ought to enjoy whatever you get your hands on in the interim. In this, there is something of the sexy Spanish, that old trope about exotic people who are more earthy and sensual, more in touch with their animal urges. If you watch a lot of Spanish cinema, Almodóvar et al, you too might come to this conclusion. Films such as Tie me Up, Tie me Down, even Jamón, jamón view love and sex with good-natured dyspepsia. Which is at least a healthy attitude. It's bound to go terribly wrong at some point, so why are we always surprised by this turn of events?

I don't think Woody Allen actually has any answers, but he enjoys asking the questions. And given his own tempestuous romantic history, it makes sense that his films would continue to go back to this particular well, and plumb the dark depths.

Heroes and schmucks

The film is dealing with very old questions, in a very old way. There are elements of Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces, with some slight differences. According to Mr. Campbell, the basic recipe is: "A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man."

If you ignore all the "man" business, the more important question becomes what exactly did they learn? What is this boon that they pass along to the rest of us? Here is where Woody Allen departs from classic structure. There are no answers when it comes to love, he tells us. There are only choices, perhaps, but even those don't entirely add up. There is an odd air of resignation in this film, or maybe more precisely elevation. It is the view of someone looking backwards, from on high even, the position of an elderly man recalling love's twists and turns with equal amounts of bemusement and sadness.

There's something about this that bugs me and it's not just the idea of Allen, as a director, moving his characters around like chess pieces. It's like a parting shot of cynicism from someone on their way out the door, saying "So, long suckers!" It's a sense of remove from someone who's done it all, realized that none of it works, and now wants to tell you about it.

Thanks a lot, Woody.

Related Tyee stories:

[Tyee]

Dorothy Woodend reviews films for The Tyee every other Friday.

15 Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • BC Mary

    3 years ago

    There's something about this that bugs me, you say?

    Me, too, Dorothy.

    This little creep has bothered since the day I bought one of Woody Allen's books to read on a BC Ferry. It was supposed to be a fun book, filled with boyish humour and human insights.

    It was, instead, like some vague photocopy of ancient Jack Benny scripts. In memory, I swear to god there were spaces left where the canned laughter machine was expected. The "book" was devoid, empty, squalid, repulsive.

    I took it to the BC Ferries washroom and left it in that little wire tray meant for important stuff like your purse or something. Left it, hoping it would save the next poor sap the cost of buying such a piece of crrrrap.

    Your final paragraph wraps it all up nicely, Dorothy. I hope I never have to see or hear the name of that little creep again.

  • Jack's

    3 years ago

    so??????

    Isn't it enough that Woody likes to write and is a standup comic at heart?

    I think I've seen every movie that he has made and there are some that I like much better than others - however, I can always bust a gut laughing at some sequence of the dialoque.

    His life sometimes has been a mess but he is a man with a great sense of humour which many surprisingly just don't get.
    It's interesting that probably more established Hollywood actors want to work with Woody than any other director.

  • G West

    3 years ago

    Yep!

    There's no accounting for 'taste'....

    Good review, as always - thanks Dorothy

  • alive

    3 years ago

    Classic

    Woody just like Chaplin at least tries to make films that have some message.
    For my taste Woody overplays his perceived handicaps, just as Red Skelton made too much out of his own shortcomings.
    Like it or not these are classics!

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    alive

    Woody Allen a "Classic" like Chaplin? Boy. THAT'S sure a stretch, alive.

  • BC Mary

    3 years ago

    Excuse me, alive ... there's no way

    .
    Me too, ME2. That's exactly what I was thinking. There's no way the miserable creep pictured above is comparable to Charlie Chaplin who made The Little Man human, universal, lovable and worthy. Dorothy Woodend is clearly struggling with that herself. Well, Dorothy, I say it's OK to despise the little creep. It's human and healthy to declare him revolting if he gives you the shudders. Give up trying to fall into line.

    But in my view, alive is spot on about Red Skelton. Both these characters (Skelton & Sex-Daddy) are p.i.a., worthy of being drop-kicked into the next pasture. Didn't Skelton just talk dumb and pull stupid Grade 2 faces?

    Whoever got paid the big $$s to promote these dismally un-funny comedians must take some of the credit, I suppose, for developing audiences incapable of telling the difference between a good U.S. president and an evil one.

    .

  • lynn

    3 years ago

    the woodman

    BC Mary and I often agree on politics but about Woody Allen I have to disagree.

    Allen's field of view focuses on a world that is unfailingly whiny, juvenile and almost high schoolish about love, but in that ability to not pretend that the world is otherwise is his true originality. Sophistication? Not when it comes to love. We are all amateurs finding our way.

    Allen's scale is intentionally small: the chatty, petty, flawed, and very quirky world we live in - all the little annoyingly human and real things that end most relationships..... but raised to grand sweeping Tolstoyian heights that wink back at you.

    So yeah, his air of resignation mentioned in the review above is to be expected....exploring the disappointments of love has always been Allen's main turf.

    And yup, I think, Dorothy's right in stating Allen's realized that "none of it works":

    Quote:
    Here is where Woody Allen departs from classic structure. There are no answers when it comes to love, he tells us. There are only choices, perhaps, but even those don't entirely add up.

    Then why should he pretend otherwise? It's his honest take.

    There is overwhelming evidence, I think, that he is right: "there are no answers when it comes to love"..."things mostly don't add up" - that he openly portrays a very unsettling fact (that the world loves to hide through the romanticized/commercial marketing of perfect easy love) - that he tells a particularly hard truth to face and makes me laugh at the same time... is enough for me.

  • bob the cat

    3 years ago

    Stand up

    I really enjoyed Allens early stand up stuff..and the goofy comedies "Bananas"..."Tiger Lily" "Take the money and run"....Allens character having escaped from prison with a group of cohorts returns home planning to meet up with his colleagues later to do a bank robbery.
    Getting dressed for the meeting with the gang he calls out to his wife " Honey have you seen my blue shirt!!?" She replies: " Its in the wash dear wear the green one"
    Allen: " You don`t wear a green shirt to a robbery!"

    The more serious he became the less I liked him and the Soon Yi, Mia Farrow affair was off putting.

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    Lynn

    As with you regarding BC Mary, I rarely disagree with you politically - or in little else, for that matter.

    So I'm baffled by your admiration of Allen's portrayals of his puerility, his inability to distinguish the difference between sex and love either personally or in acting mode.

    Done once or perhaps twice, he might legitimatly claim acting prowess, but his repetitive exploitation of his immaturity suggests - to me anyway - a leper capitalising upon the display of his disfigurements, something which seen once should be plenty enough.

  • lynn

    3 years ago

    Life is complicated

    Quote:
    I'm baffled by your admiration of Allen's portrayals of his puerility, his inability to distinguish the difference between sex and love either personally or in acting mode.

    Sorry, that's a red herring ME2. That was not my argument. I never said I admired Allen's portrayal of his puerility....or any of that for that matter. I said he had the honesty to portray our oftentimes immaturity when it comes to love....our anxieties, our childishness, our pettiness when it comes to love....and to not back off from the hard truth of that portrayal. I never said I admired any of those traits nor did I equate them in a personal sense to Woody Allen.....I said I admired the honesty of taking on that difficult and unsettling turf: that "there are no answers when it comes to love"...and "things mostly don't add up."

    There is not much in my life that identifies with the Manhatten landscape of most of his movies but the dilemnas of his characters, their flaws and foibles, their search for love are universal ones. It isn't the grand gesture, the epic form of love we see portrayed, in for instance the movies of David Lean, a brilliant filmmaker. Allen's movies explore relationships and love in its smaller dimensions, when it becomes less generous, more biting, more anxious...more deceptive, more unsure....often more trivial...and funny in human terms because of that.

    The course of love travels these less noble routes as well.

    Allen films a different measure of love than say, Lean's.... but no less true.

    It's not Allen's "repetitive exploitation of his immaturity" - it's his exploration of the immaturity of us so-called grown-up human beings, all of us, when it comes to love and relationships. That's what I admire in him - his honesty to not pretend that we are not always wise, or generous...or even fair when it comes to love. And that is not to say that a mature full-bodied love is not wished for by most of us or impossible....only that most of us struggle along the way.

    As for Mr. Allen, I never mentioned him personally at all in my piece....I have no idea if he can personally distinguish between sex and love. Nor do I have any idea if you can, ME2....so I prefer to say nothing in that regard.

    Quote:
    a leper capitalising upon the display of his disfigurements

    That's a pretty weighty stone you got there, ME2. I have no interest in casting it.

  • Pepa

    3 years ago

    Vicky: Not so masterful

    So Vicky is doing a master's in Catalan identity and she speaks neither Catalan or Spanish. Weird.

    Juan Antonio is supposed to be a Catalonian artist, but he doesn't speak Catalonian either, not even to his father. Weirder.

    I thought the ending was quite realistic. Stuff happens and you go on. Sometimes things don't tie up all nice and neat.

  • Step easy

    3 years ago

    the neuroses' of woody

    This movie is this one mans' take on love or sex or both. So what?
    The fact that it has stuck in this critic's brain for the past few weeks indicates to me that there must be something in this film that made her think. (Or makes her angry or 'bugs her') Either way, if that's the case, then the filmmaker has done his job. It is not the filmmaker's duty to make the audience feel comfortable or at ease or to give them a nice, bubbly story.

    Let's face it, Woody Allen is an idiosyncratic independant filmmaker who seemingly enjoys sharing his neuroses with the film-going public and anyone familiar with his films should have accepted this by now.

    Personally, i enjoyed the film for what it was, one person's view on love and sex and the seeming futility of it all.

    Above all, the film actually made me laugh. It is silly, sad in a way, even if it does come across as a bit cynical. And ultimately it does beg the question, can there ever be any such thing as permanent, lasting love and contentment?

    Anyway it was nice to just watch and indulge in a little fantasy about art and Spain and erotic, feisty women.

  • ME2

    3 years ago

    Lynn

    Obviously, we differ much in our read of Mr Allen. Nor does there seem to be a consensus here, either. But please reread what I wrote and have now bolded :

    "So I'm baffled by your admiration of Allen's portryals of his puerility,"

    ....and what you wrote and I've bolded :

    "That's what I admire in him - his honesty to not pretend that we are not always wise, or generous...or even fair when it comes to love.

    So the issue where we really differ becomes whether he displays honest talent in his portrayals, or is merely exploiting his failings. And here we will remain in disagreement

    But regarding my expertise in sex & love, vs his, all I can say there is that even in his failures he's got me, hands down. Yup, I coulda stood some of them failures.......

  • CNS

    3 years ago

    Really...

    I didn't see this movie having a "So, long suckers!" but more a make sure you're enjoying yourself/getting what you need in the meantime. The fact that there were no answers was refreshing vs. the usual and it ended happily ever after or it didn't.

    I thought it was brilliant and this from someone who normally pitches her tent in the I Hate Woody Allen camp.

  • lynn

    3 years ago

    ME2

    I see your point, ME2....though I would add there may be an unacknowledged "maturity" in the ability to admit one's immaturity and failings in love. ;-)

    I see Allen as an artist that isn't just portraying himself but the universality of all our failings when it comes to love and relationships.... on whether or not he is exploiting that, as you say, we disagree.

    I didn't mean to sound harsh on the sex and love comment...if I did I apologize, ME2. I've always respected the personal honesty of your commentary.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.