Clevercell Very disappointing...

SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Acensbart Excellent but underrated film

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

jerrywarriner If the audience is supposed to tell which version of the story is a comedy and which is a tragedy, then I can only say, "good luck." There are no visual or audio cues to alert the audience to a switch in the versions. Perhaps a quick wipe accompanied by a sliding sound would alert the viewer to the switch.Even worse, both versions contain elements of both the comic and tragic, so the separation of the versions is even more difficult to discern. If Mr. Allen threw the pages of the script in the air and re-assembled them in no particular order, he could have done no worse.Because, with a few exceptions I'm not familiar with the performers, they looked to me like clones. Perhaps Allen should have instructed them to wear name tags.I like many of Allen's films. The tragic and comic elements in "Crimes and Misdemeanors" are clear cut and don't require captions that read "This is comic" and "This is tragic." The last thing I want to hear from pretentious M&M fans is the comment, "It's so obvious you must be awfully obtuse."

runamokprods An interesting experiment: telling the same story, intercut, in both comic and serious versions. Lots of striking moments, and some good acting (although Will Ferrell - as much as I'm a fan - trying to be 'serious' didn't really work for me). Also, the bookend device setting up the idea (two writers talking at a restaurant about the differences between comedy and tragedy) is clunky and a little on the nose. Still, a worthwhile attempt to look at how we tell stories, and by extension how we look at life. Allen's later films may not quite be at the level of his early work, but you gotta admire a filmmaker still trying to look at the big questions 40 years into his career.

Kuroel Can't remember an Allen movie I actually liked, but I decided to give this movie a shot nonetheless. The concept was very delightful, but sure enough, Allen is still bad.We all know the usual mannerism of Will Ferrell, but much like every other character in this movie, his delivery was more like an imitation of Allen himself - down to the stuttering. I completely agree with another reviewer who questioned "How many actors can he get to stand in for his own neurotic, compulsive über-New Yorker persona?"Allen's directing style is very distinguished, but I'd say more like repetitive. He's basically producing never ending remakes of the same story with the same characters. The dialogue was horrendous. Wooden clichés sprinkled with occasional fancy words. Hobie considers himself to be an intellect (like all the characters that are projections of Allen) yet he speaks and stutters like a 10-year-old. Then, in the middle of mindless repetitive ramblings where he goes on and on and on about some extremely mundane topic, he throws in a completely random reference to Dostoyevsky or Kieślowski. Wha? Worst thing is - I really think that Woody is giving himself pat on the back for the "ingenious" cultural references. The cinematography wasn't a treat, either. In one of the restaurant scenes the camera sweep was so bad it was painful to watch.Without giving out too much about the ending, the dialogue was so embarrassingly corny, I thought it was a dream sequence until the credits began to roll on the screen. The ending could have been cobbled together by an average 12-year-old fan-fiction writer.

tillc Read more at http://blog.ParcEntertainment.comFollow me on Twitter - http://www.Twitter.com/ParcHDVideoHow one goes through life depends entirely on his or her perspective. One individual might see the tragedy inherent in a specific event, and yet someone else might perceive the same event to be a positive. Is the event itself tragic or comic, or does it depend solely upon your point of view?This philosophical merry-go-round is the foundation for Woody Allen's 2004 film, Melinda and Melinda. The film opens at a restaurant where four friends are in the middle of a conversation about life and relationships. Two of the friends are playwrights. One friend says that life is inherently tragic, but the other claims that life is inherently comic. A third friend sets the plot in motion when he asks the two playwrights to listen to a story and then comment on whether the tale is best viewed as a tragedy or comedy.From that point, the film follows two parallel stories, centering on Melinda, a young woman trying to get her life back together after a series of bad relationships and self-destructive behavior. One story follows a dramatic interpretation, and one follows the conventions of a romantic comedy.The premise of following parallel stories is engaging, although clichéd and formulaic. This movie would not seem quite so original had it been produced as a stand-alone tragedy or comedy. But because both story arcs are shown side by side, the film is much more interesting. I think most people enjoy contemplating how life's course can be set in one direction or another by events outside their control. It's fun to imagine what if? scenarios, thinking how things could have been different, if only…The dialogue in the film is a number of things - snappy, clever, poetic, and philosophical. Allen allows his characters to speak what many of us only think. The danger of doing so, however, is that a lot of the dialogue is too on-the-nose and expository. It doesn't ring true for real life. Characters (Melinda especially) engage in reflective and introspective monologues that are often tedious. At times it feels more like a stage play than a film, but perhaps that's the intent, considering that we are seeing this story through the eyes of two playwrights.Of the two "Melinda" stories, the light-hearted, comedic tale is much more interesting, due to the talents of the actors on screen. Will Ferrell plays Hobie, a struggling actor married to an up-and-coming director played by Amanda Peet.Ferrell's Hobie is charming and innocent, and he falls for Melinda (played by Radha Mitchell) when he realizes his marriage is going nowhere. Peet is equally likable as the ambitious workaholic filmmaker, striving to lock in the extra money to get her first feature into production. The dynamic between Ferrell and Mitchell is fun to watch, and the dialogue between the two rings truer than the dramatic counterpart of the film.The weaker of the two stories is the dramatic interpretation. Here, the characters are far less interesting, the dialogue far too stilted, and the acting too melodramatic. Aside from Mitchell's performance, the ensemble around her was flat, stiff, and too over-the-top. Mitchell's portrayal as the emotionally disturbed and suicidal Melinda really carried this portion of the film.Overall, Melinda and Melinda explores some very human themes in very conventional ways, but presents them in a unique way.