Part Three: Diane Keaton to Charlotte Rampling

Woody Allen's lead women serve as bridges between various forms of insanity, provide an air of sophistication and enigma to each role and in one instance, becomes the cold heart at the center of his coldest film: Diane Keaton, Elaine May, Radha Mitchell, Emily Mortimer, Samantha Morton, Geraldine Page and Charlotte Rampling.

Diane Keaton
Play it Again Sam (1972), Sleeper (1973), Love and Death (1975), Annie Hall (1977), Interiors (1978), Manhattan (1979), Radio Days (1987), Manhattan Murder Mystery (1993)

Diane Keaton played different types of people in different types of Woody Allen films, while always seeming herself. Even in her first scene of her first film with Allen, 1972’s Play It Again, Sam (not directed but written by Allen, based on his play, which Keaton acted in), she flashes her inimitable smile, a soft one that’s also self-deprecating, while sharing jokes with him about their neuroses. In her next five Allen films she played a poet in a slapstick science-fiction future (Sleeper); a brainy, lusty heiress in his Russian literature spoof (Love and Death); the eccentric, neurotic, immortal Annie Hall; a tormented author in one of Allen’s stoic Bergmanesque dramas (Interiors); and a brash urban intellectual with a chaotic life (Manhattan). In each case except Interiors, she plays Allen’s love interest, yet her character is always as memorable as his.

Those five films, from 1972 to 1979, represent Allen’s move from straight-up silly comedies to the more romance-centered comedy/dramas that became his stock-and-trade, and the template that many romantic comedies have followed since. Keaton starred in his films at the very time that his style was maturing, and can easily be seen as an important part of that maturation. To say she was growing as an actress as his films were growing in depth may be true, but the statement has a note of condescension to it. More accurate is to point out the important role her acting played in the development of his filmmaking.

In his early comedies, she’s playing the straight-man; deadpan, but capable of drawing laughs from her expressions and the timing of her lines. As Allen’s films change, her characters become more developed, building her memorable way of reacting to Allen’s jokes, with a knowing look or sometimes by not reacting at all, into a way of projecting multiple emotions at once. In Annie Hall, Manhattan and even the more dour Interiors, she makes emotional outbursts, tears and smiles all part of the same action. There’s a scene in Manhattan where she bounces between an argument with her married lover (Michael Murphy) and answering routine phone calls, even handling the dog, in one motion. It suggests the way people really act, where drama is part of daily life, not a series of big moments.

Annie Hall was Allen’s turning-point movie, which makes Keaton’s Annie Hall a turning-point character (also an Oscar-winning one). Allen has said he wrote the role specifically for her. He gave her the last name Keaton was born with. More important is what viewers see, the way Annie Hall’s eccentric behavior and inner conflicts are projected by Keaton in her face, body and speech. She puts us there with Allen, adoring her more with each encounter. Even the most casual watcher of romantic comedies since Annie Hall could tell that the female half of many movie couples follows the prototype set by Keaton as Hall. Try to think of a hit romantic comedy where the woman’s “quirkiness” isn’t foregrounded.

Keaton made two returns to Allen’s film world. Both have a sweetness that’s a testament to the heartwarming presence Keaton has in Allen’s overall filmography. In the nostalgic Radio Days (1987), her role is as singer only, but her song (“You’d Be So Nice to Come Home To”) plays in its entirety, and has an emotional pull that speaks to the characters’ circumstances.

Manhattan Murder Mystery (1993) was even sweeter, a light mystery film, an homage to film noir, that also 'rhymes' with Annie Hall in interesting ways. Co-written with Marshall Brickman, who co-wrote Annie Hall, the film was sort of spun from a murder-mystery plot that was part of Annie Hall early on, when that film had a different name and hadn’t yet been skillfully, historically, edited. In Manhattan Murder Mystery, as in so many Allen films, both main characters are pursuing the notion of other lives they could have lived. Here they do it like they’re dipping their feet in water. Keaton’s scenes with Alan Alda, playing a longtime friend who always had a crush on her, are particularly affecting, because the characters have history together and the actors show it in their ease around each other. Their camaraderie is different than that of Allen and Keaton. That contrast is significant, woven into the film’s jokes.

History is evident between the Keaton and Allen’s characters, too. The resonance with viewers comes from both the actors’ comfort with each other and our associations with them as a couple. There’s a scene in Manhattan Murder Mystery where Keaton’s character wonders whether their life has become too stagnant. Have they become “just another dull aging couple…a pair of comfortable old shoes”? If you look at it from the right angle, it’s easy to imagine this as an alternate future for Annie Hall and Alvy Singer.

Dave Heaton


Juliette Lewis
Husbands and Wives (1992)

Husbands and Wives is a meta masterpiece of what is perhaps Woody Allen’s most treasured themes: Men acrobatically stabbing themselves in the heart with their own raging, woebegone erections.

Throughout the film, men wildly gesticulate, fumble and burst, “I’m confused! I’m upset!” All of this erotic confusion is smothered in intellectual airs thick enough to choke a horse. Allen’s Gabe is a Columbia writing professor who pivots on his podium so that his smarmy bespectacled eyes are trained on the glimmering ingénue, played this particular round with a sharp twist and off-kilter charm by then 19-year-old Juliette Lewis, just a few years before her star-making turn as natural born killer, Mallory Knox.

Lewis’ TK readily sees through Allen. As Allen flirts with Lewis over a story she wrote for his class, she calls him to task: “Why are you asking me so many questions?” He fumbles, exposed. “The writing was very intense.”

Countering all of the typical Allen tricks, she refutes the idea that you need to live an exotic life in order to write anything worth reading. He presses her about the “worldliness” in her work. “It’s just a trick. You don’t have to know,” she says and tells him about writing a story about Paris when she was ten, even though she had never been to Paris.

Allen pulls no punches and doesn’t attempt to disguise that he plays cad to Lewis’ ingénue. Instead, he organizes a ping-pong match between the two of them and then uses a mockumentary-style fourth-wall confessions full of jump cuts that brutally expose how painfully aware Gabe is of his faults.

Struggle as he might, intellectualism can’t save Gabe. After all, acute awareness of being a jerk doesn’t make you any less of a jerk. (Perhaps, Allen seems to be saying, it makes you a bigger jerk.) Later, Gabe talks about other professors who are notorious for seducing students. “This goes on,” he says, “Cause it’s a cinch.”

Allen’s cast of stock characters usually contains two ingénue types: the all-accepting adoring and the rebellious Lolita that serves him his comeuppance. Rain defies Gabe’s expectations by beginning at the former then turning into the latter.

In class, Rain blushes and coos, “Your affirmation means more to me than anybody’s.” Then later, she criticizes the manuscript Gabe gave her to read. His only copy, she then loses it in the back of a cab—perhaps, she muses, she lost it on purpose on a subconscious level because she is, after all, competing with him. When Rain challenges his attitudes in the manuscript, he recoils in horror and calls her a “twenty-year-old twit.”

Lewis’ Rain is an Upper West Side Lolita that embodies both types: she is submissive in that she is literally his student and lives with her parents, but she has also already indulged in a series of affairs with older men. “What am I doing with these older men?” she wonders aloud, while recounting her series of affairs—including her analyst—for Gabe. About her affairs with older men, Rain muses: “In the end, I felt I was kind of symbol of lost youth or unfilled dreams,” Rain muses. “Or am I being too dramatic? Of course, Gabe, wonders the same. As was Allen in 1992, whose personal life lead the New York Times to begin the review of the film with, “WELL, what about the movie?”

Tara Murtha

Next Page

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.