Bullets Over Broadway

This movie was disgusting! It made me sick, all over my wife, now I have to get a divorce. Thanks for nothing John Cusack.

A film that manages to make some very interesting observations on the nature of art and artists while also being very lighthearted and funny. The script is one of Allen's best, and the cast of characters is excellent (especially Chazz Palminteri, who I've always thought was great). No real complaints here.

Great set designs and costumes, very well written and nicely directed. Chazz Palminteri is the highlight as Cheech, really good performance. Never a dull moment, just pure entertainment. Another home run for Allen.

Dominated by a fantastic supporting cast. Chazz Palminteri's character is hilarious.

Allen considers the social value of art. Cusack's self-proclaimed auteur repeatedly compromises his work for success, while Palminteri's gangster playwright is willing to take extreme measures to protect his artistic merit. It's a wonderful realization of a time and place, with nice costume and set designs. Dianne Wiest steals the screen as a Norma Desmond-type has-been, leading a cast of memorable eccentrics.

The best Woody Allen movie without Woody Allen in it. All the elements come together perfectly. Allen seems to bring out the best in otherwise lame actors like Dianne Wiest and Jennifer Tilly.

Memorable, but flawed. I wish it weren't a comedy. What made the movie for me was the gangster elements and the musings on what it is to be an artist, and there's more than enough going on in those departments to have made this into a though-provoking, dark drama. I liked Palminteri, Viterelli and Cusack, but the unfunny humouristic parts (the "Don't speak" routine in particular) lessened the film.

This film was enjoyable enough. I like several members of the cast a lot. It was fun and occasionally funny but nothing too special or that I hadn't seen before. A typically wordy Woody Allen script and very over-the-top characters. I didn't love it, but I certainly didn't dislike it either.

Despite the somewhat original setting and the shockingly sophisticated use of color and shadow, this is pretty much a generic Allen effort -which is to say that it's highly amusing if disposable. Sure, there is entertainment value to be found in the cartoonish characters and the well-worn running gags and the -trite by this point- dilemmas about the artistic duty. But we've seen it all before in better, more original films -either by Woody or by others.

Really enjoy this one. People say it's the last truly-LOL Woody movie, and while I don't really agree (Deconstructing Harry exists), I can see why it has that reputation. Pretty much non-stop fairly light-hearted goofiness up until the violent climax (which is still pretty funny). Palminteri, for my money, turns in one of the best performances in any Allen movie, but, really, the whole cast is excellent. I mean, look at Jim Broadbent somehow making a "lol he's so fat" character actually funny.

Entertaining behind the scenes look at the making of a theatre play that gets some inspiration from a surprising source, though the film only flirts with, but never delves deep, into the reasons why a gangster would prove to be more artful than a regular aspiring playwright. The performances are all pretty terrific, especially Tilly and Wiest, who really bring a lot of humour to this period setting. Unfortunately, the ending is really, really lame.

Movie 1800. The similarities to Purple Rose of Cairo are there, but I think they're superficial. This one lacks the same amount of originality; as enjoyable as Bullets Over Broadway is, it's pretty standard stuff. But it works because Chazz Palminteri's performance is so good and Cusack is a solid Woody stand-in (but this would have been a much better movie if Woody was actually in it). The last scene is perfect. "I thought you were yelling, 'Do it! Do it!'"

Not a whole lot to say about this one other than it's fun and it made me laugh. In terms of performances, some are great, others are too manic and shouty, but overall it's pretty enjoyable.

One of Woody's best recent movies. I enjoyed the references to his past work, especially the not-so-subtle one to Hannah and Her Sisters. Cheech was a fantastically likable character.

A funny film, and also an interesting exploration of the mystery of artistic gifts. Thematically very similar to Amadeus, with Cusack as Salieri and Chaz Palmantieri (who is very, very good) as the gangster who is Mozart.

Is that Rob Reiner? Yes it is. Is that Harold Ramis? No it's not. Is that Mary Louise Parker? Yes it is. Is that Woody Allen? No it's not. Is that John Cusack? ...Kinda, I guess. I mean, technically, I think. Is that a masturbatory film about film? Yeah dawg, it totally is.

The hiccups come from Cusack's character, which is way too unbelievably Woody Allen-like. When he's allowed to step away from the Allenisms and neuroses, usually only for a smoke break (Woody doesn't smoke or drink, get it?), he really shines. The rest of the movie is a neat meditation on artistic integrity and self-doubt, with one horribly fucking creepy line from Rob Reiner, "an artist creates his own moral space." Hello, Soon-Yi! Diane Wiest was also good, and completely unrecognizable.

Yet another very funny Allen comedy with plenty of tasty subtext

"Don't speak! Don't speak!" - Allen takes a stab at the writing/production process making serious points while making fun of it. You can really feel Cusack has a blast as a nerdy and not very talented writer who despite his best efforts ends up becoming excactly the kind of director he tries not to be. Still Palminteri (and not Wiest in my opinion) really steels the show. And the ending is just terrific.

Really boring and unfunny, made worse by the fact that it is obviously trying extremely hard to be "witty", and failing badly. Almost none of the jokes work, and all the dialog sounds stilted and contrived. The only decent performance in this film is from the mob goon turned writer, and even he has to wade through a whole script full of hammy lines.

87.000

John Cusack is the best Woody-surrogate. And Diane Wiest does Norma Desmond better than anybody not named Gloria Swanson

The gangster Don's girl, actress with annoying dog, actor with a substantially desire for food, vain men eater actress.... With all this you get a good parody...

Overall Enjoyment: 35/40, Plot/Themes: 15/20, Cinematography/Direction: 20/20, Acting/Writing: 20/20 My favorite Woody Allen film.

This film has a stronger storyline than usual Woody's talkie. It gets a bit meta in a funny way - telling Jennifer Tilly she's a horrible actress and shooting her dead were my exact sentiments towards her. This was third Allen film I watched in a row and I feel I had enough of him for a while; his movies are just too dry and alike.

Good film.

This is one of the best films by Woody Allen. The script is really funny and there is a nice ensemble cast. There are numerous laugh out loud moments. I highly recommend this comedy.

Pretty funny movie. The movie is what it is because of the story and the cast together. If either one of these two were missing the movie would have fallen apart. Chazz Palminteri carries most of the movie.

Good but not great. Chazz Palminteri is the best part and Cusack is a close second. Jim Broadbent also has some good moments. But the rest of the cast, for the most part, annoys me. I don't care how well-written Jennifer Tilly's dialog is, she's unwatchable. I enjoy the themes of art and morality (common Allen territory), and I like how the events play out, but overall not as entertaining as it could have been. Mid-tier Allen.

I think Allen was getting less and less ambitious and creative by this point, but Bullets is still a charming and funny comedy in his distinctive style.

Above average Allen comedy. A bit stretched in the screenplay department but the game cast makes up for it.

The first part is necessary to the final part, but lacks the intriguing "writer working with gangster" aspect. What the film wants to illustrate is, that everyone is an artist, and just because you can quote Strindberg or Chekhov, doesn't necessarily makes you a good one - and this is done in a almost hysterical satirical way. This ironic distance really suits Allen.

The period dressing, locations and visuals are outstanding. The characters are fun, the conceit is great. The staging is fun in spots yet inconsistent. The acting is poor in spots. The first 30 mins of the film should have been reshot. The story arc of Cheech is unconvincing, ironic as he rewrites the play to give it's characters more convincing motivations. The Allen neurotic/frenetic aesthetic displaced what could have been more genuine comedic sequences.

I'm not an artist and I love you

pretty good Allen film

Seen: 2.