I thought both Hall and Johansson were horrible in their scenes together but good (or, in Hall’s case, very good) with anyone else.

My friend and I agreed that the voiceover must, of course, be intentionally horrible (people laughed out loud at it’s badness) but we couldn’t figure out what that would serve. Any ideas, anyone?

I found it quite frustrating, as I thought it could have been one of his best films, possibly, but he just couldn’t make it gel properly, largely because, I think, he was too slavish in executing his worn archetypes.

Conversely, you might like my review, as it approaches Allen in the context of where he has been, where he is and where he may be going.

Ok, good. I’m glad we’ve each had a chance to spew our feelings all over the comments section. Whatever I might think about the film, it says a lot about it that it pulls these kinds of responses and reactions out of me and others.

I’m Vicky and you’re Cristina with shades of Vicky.

Well, I never thought I’d write a sentence like that on here.

I’m sure you didn’t intend to offend me. You said so…and you absolutely didn’t.

BUT MARIA ELENA is nuts and she tried to commit suicide. So how could I even begin to relate to her? Possibly you saw something in her that I didn’t see. She wasn’t particularly likable either.

I think (truthfully) that I’m a combination of CRISTINA and VICKY. VICKY had a real practical side to her and she didn’t hesitate to tell JUAN ANTONIO where to step off at the beginning. She felt that that was pretty outrageous. But as JAVIER said in one of the interviews that I put up on site, there’s much more to JUAN ANTONIO than meets the eye. He can’t be alone for five minutes, so he has to put it out there and do it fast.

I’m sensual and impulsive like CRISTINA. But I wouldn’t have been impressed with a man who proposed that kind of stuff at a first meeting. I may find him hot. But I wouldn’t take him seriously. JUAN ANTONIO is only appealing because he’s JAVIER BARDEM and it’s a movie. Strangers can be very dangerous. Plus they may have cooties.

Believe me, I had HEARD IT ALL by the time I was 17. I’ve received some fairly blatant proposals in my time too – and some not so distasteful. From some famous men as well. Names you might recognize.

CRISTINA also had an on going menage a trois. I love men and I’ve never had any physical contact with another woman. Those three way deals in any way shape or form don’t send me.

CRISTINA was quicker on the uptake than me as well. Am I more like VICKY? Well, I don’t believe in dragging it out. But people have to walk their talk. If they can’t then there’s not an actual point.

So there are more similarities between CRISTINA and myself for sure. But I did recognize some traits from VICKY as well. But I don’t think that MARIA ELENA and I have anything in common at all.

I understand what you’re saying about the marriage and commitment thing. I’ve been commitment phobic my entire life and I really don’t fall in love that often. I care for people. I like them. I’m fond of them. But real love? No. A few times, sure. But it’s not something that happens often for me.

I certainly think when you have a family that that changes everything. Your priorities become very different. They have to be.

For me it’s not an issue. I MAY marry (I’m ambivalent but it’s not something I’m opposed to) but I was never cut out to be a mother. I had a very serious (potentially fatal) illness three years ago. Due to the treatment I had, I can never have children now. It won’t ever happen. I’m very relieved. As much as I love kids (and kids DO adore me) I was never cut out for any of that.

There’s a lot that I want to accomplish career wise and I have a healthy ego and a strong personality. The centre of my universe is ME. So I know that that was just as well.

I dated an English boy earlier this year. I’ve been REALLY friendly with my exes over time. (Always been a practical girl. I know where to go when I want something.)

But there are some things that I don’t ever talk about. I’m not always THAT open about my romantic life or other important issues.

I have my own circle on the net that I cherish and adore. They’ll find stuff out from me and they’re the only ones that need to know.

Whatever goes on, they won’t be reading it publicly…

Let me phrase this in practical terms (by the way, I’m just talking here, this isn’t meant as a critique or indictment of you or anything else). I’m married to my college sweetheart, whom I love (along with my two children) more than anyone else in the entire world. We’re extremely compatible, have a wonderful time together, laugh a lot, watch all kinds of films and discuss them, etc. etc. We make a great match. Now, with two children in our lives, the opportunities for ‘romance’ are much, much fewer. That’s just the way it goes. It takes a lot more work to keep our relationship in a healthy state when we’ve got two tiny human beings demanding a constant stream of food and attention.

Are there moments when I wish I could relive the ‘thrill’ of a spontaneous romantic encounter again (which my wife and I had plenty of when we first met)? Yes, there are. They don’t happen that often, but they do occur now and then. You could say I’m like Vicky, married to the best person in the world for me, but experiencing flashes where I briefly want something else.

The question is, what do I do in those moments? Well, I don’t necessarily ignore them, but I don’t give them any oxygen to breathe, either. Love, in many ways, is a choice, not a feeling. I know that sounds about as romantic as a muddy puddle, but I believe its the truth. I experience plenty of romantic moments with my wife still. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not like the ‘magic’ has all died out or anything. But there are a lot of moments where I have to choose to love her. Like when our son is crying at 2:30 in the morning and she wants me to get up and take care of him. Do I want to do that? Nope. Do I necessarily enjoy doing that? Nope. But I choose to do it, because I love her. There are no romantic feelings there at all, but there is an enormous amount of love.

In some ways thats what frustrates me about this film. There aren’t those moments of sacrifice and selflessness that provide the real ingredients for a healthy, successful relationship. Its all about living in the moment and doing what you want to do and there, at the end, Vicky is miserable because she’s stuck married to a Mr. Plain while Juan Antonio is back in Barcelona. She didn’t act on her impulses, but she hates herself for it.

Things may change (ok, things WILL change), but I’m with my wife for the long haul. I don’t say that in any kind of idealistic sense – it’s written in rock for me. There will be ups and downs (there have already been plenty), but one thing will always remain the same: she’s my wife and I’m going to love her no matter what.

WHEW. I didn’t expect to write all of that. Like I said before, this isn’t meant as an indictment of you at all, Miranda. Like you said, I imagine we approach life from different angles at times, which gives us very different perspectives on films like this.

Which is a wonderful thing, because we get to have great, interesting conversations about life and love and everything in between (well, at least I think they’re interesting).

Drama follows me wherever I go.

Being a tempestuous Irish babe DOES have its downside…..

I just finished mine and I gave VCB four stars.

Best WOODY in a decade for my money. Easily. I haven’t loved a WOODY ALLEN film this much since CELEBRITY (which was a three star proposition in my estimation). You’d have to go all the way back to the early 90s to find something out of his filmography that I adored at that level.

(I’d give HUSBANDS & WIVES five stars and ALICE four.)

It’s not often that a critique from someone causes me to ponder a film that I was completely satisfied with anyway. (You had production notes, too, you cheater. Hah. Not all of us – particularly some of us stuck up here in the Pacific Northwest – have the luxury of such grandiose materials.)

Maybe it’s because I don’t necessarily concentrate on themes but become far more intrigued and interested in other components. As you state so eloquently, this is a breathtakingly beautiful picture populated by ultraglamourous actors that are giving supremely good performances.

You see a lot of things in terms of a film that I don’t. Those sorts of differences were brought up over at my site in regards to the French film PRICELESS.

Yeah…Like that bit about “only unfulfilled love can ever be romantic”. I had to let some stuff go. Otherwise the review would have turned into a dissertation. But I didn’t address that. I suppose that could refer to VICKY and JUAN ANTONIO. The same goes for the “missing ingredient” thing as referred to CRISTINA.

Hey, I wouldn’t be opposed to a little guy on guy action. I used to watch the American version of QUEER AS FOLK on television and believe me…There are lots of women (including moi) that find two men kissing, making out etc. sexy as hell.

BUT WOODY was bloody lucky to get that film financed AND he had to go to Barcelona to do it. Realistically, many Europeans are pretty open sexually. SOME North Americans. But a lot of people are pretty puritanical here.

In terms of a selling point, what’s going to do it outside of Europe – JAVIER making out with GAEL GARCIA BERNAL or MATTHEW GOODE (just as examples) or PENELOPE CRUZ and SCARLETT JOHANSSON fooling around? Uh…no contest.

It’s always seemed like a silly fantasy to me. But it does happen to be a recurring one for many men. (NOT people I’ve dated, though – and I talk about that stuff pretty frankly with the men in my life.) Considering that A LOT of men can’t even satisfy ONE woman.

Hah hah. But the operative word is FANTASY, right? Most men are little boys. Still out playing with their dump trucks and wondering who’s got the biggest one.

I think that this is what WOODY is trying to say:

NONE of us will EVER be satisfied. EVER – because even if we marry the perfect person life gets in the way. That relationship can change drastically. In a million different ways. Some of which I’ve never dealt with and wouldn’t apply to me anyway.

But either of you can leave. Cheat on the other. Your spouse can gain so much weight (or lose so much) that you don’t find them attractive any more. They may want to stop having sex with you for whatever reason. They could develop a brain tumour and start acting erraticly. They could die.

You didn’t sign up for that, didn’t expect it, want it or need it. But any of it COULD conceivably happen.

But say you DON’T find the person of your dreams…

We all (at various times in our lives) have yearned for someone who could not be with us. Maybe they even wanted to be. But it just wasn’t happening.

There are people that want to be with you that are not able to be. People that you’d like to be with and you know it’s just not possible.

Men and women will always burn, yearn, lust, smolder, fall passionately in love endlessly, eternally…because there are fartoo many variables and life is naturally unsettled, constantly changing and never endingly in flux.

OSCAR WILDE said (at least I THINK it was him): There are two tragedies in life. One is not getting what you want. THE OTHER IS GETTING IT.

It also reminds me of an old JESSICA LANGE interview that I dug out on the net. (I’ve always adored her. She’s a very cool woman.)

She had married young and that hadn’t worked out. Went to Paris. Modelled. Studied mime. Got involved with BOB FOSSE and then was in the middle of a tempestous relationship with MIKHAIL BARYSHNIKOV. (They never married but they have a daughter.) She took up with SAM SHEPARD permanently after this interview was published. They’re still together and she has a couple of kids with him.

The interviewer was discussing relationships with her. JESSICA said she felt a lot of pressure being in the public eye. Especially being involved with another famous person. He also had his own career and his own life. So it was tough.

She mentioned that she didn’t want to have to work at it. She didn’t expect it to flow like rivers of honey but she said she was paid to do a job (acting) and she didn’t want to have to make that many sacrifices in her personal life to keep it on an even keel. She wanted to have a stable romantic life. But she didn’t want to give up everything for it.

So the interviewer’s take was, “If a good looking, desirable, talented woman like yourself can’t get a grip on this mess where does that leave the rest of us?”

JESSICA laughed uproariously. “FUCKED,” she said.

Yeah…I think she’s right.

Evan, your take is definitely provocative intellectually and gives one a lot of food for thought.

We mostly agree (there’s only half a star’s difference) but your review certainly gives one a great deal to ponder.

See, not being a WOODY aficionado didn’t hold you back AT ALL…

I love her.

As a guy who’s seen every Allen film, and a number of them plenty of times, I’m always willing to give him an honest shot, every time out, which means approximately once a year. This film looks more classically Allen, and some critics have actually dared to compare it to Annie Hall and Manhattan, or at least have said that they can see that the auteur who made those works made this. It’s probably foolhardy to have such incredible expectations, however, so I’m keeping mine grounded, but I do expect something more vital than what we’ve largely recently received from Allen.

It’s difficult to address whether or not I disagree with his notions of love when he apparently has so many, so my hang-up would be the latter: he’s saying too many things, things that contradict one another. The quote from the production notes that I included indicates that he is aware of this as well and even welcomes it to an extent.

I agree with you: it’s much better in old age to think that you don’t have everything figured out rather than to believe you’ve got a perfect understanding of life. But within the confines of a film, saying that you don’t understand love by throwing out 3-4 different competing theses on the subject is dissatisfying. I’m fine with exploring different facets of love, and if he had refined his focus more I could have then responded to it personally, but he doesn’t so it becomes problematic to say whether or not I agree with him.

I think there would be a simpler way to get across the fact that you don’t have everything about love figured out. As it stands now, the film is just muddled and confusing, and it’s difficult to take anything away from it other than the aesthetic beauty of the setting and the acting.

Allen is 72 years old and there’s a couple ways to go when you’re that old. Either you can be as cemented into one way of looking at life that you can’t see past it. A lot of folks harden like that in their thirties, some even earlier.

The other way for a 72-year old to be is to have learned through his life that he doesn’t know everything about life, and in this case, love and still wants to explore the various ramifications of things. Robert Altman was like that to his dying day. I’m glad Woody — with all his well-known hang-ups, both sexual and otherwise — is in that camp as well.

Great review, Evan.