I saw this one again and I'd say it holds up better with repeated viewings. I loved the theme of "lucky and unlucky," and it all comes together towards the end. The thing that I do not remember thinking the first time around was how whiny Nola was. My feelings toward her changed completely towards the end, of course, but man, did she get on my nerves in a few spots.

Seriously. I'd shoot more bullets to her head though.

I thought this would be right up my alley. Wrong I was.

I liked what Allen was trying to do with the themes of luck and the role it plays in our lives, and despite being surprisingly bored by the first two-thirds of the film, I thought he was taking the story somewhere that would successfully, or at least cleverly, integrate the film's thematic material into its plotline.

But it never happened for me. The film picks up in its last third, but the method through which Allen ties luck into the plot just confounded me with its absurdity. Maybe a bit more subtlety could have benefited the film, but ultimately I just don't think Allen's musings on luck were strong enough to warrant a film on the subject.

C

*SPOILERS*

Remember that scene in Pulp Fiction where John Travolta delivers a shot of adrenaline into Uma Thurman's chest with surgeon-like accuracy? Well, this is exactly what Match Point has done for Woody Allen's career. To even call it a comeback would be an understatement: it's a reinvention.

Allen manages to craft a well-paced, character driven story, while infusing it with the London environment and the central theme of luck. That one scene where Rhyes-Myers shoots the old lady and Johansson is so shocking and disturbing that it acts as a testament to Allen's ability to develop the characters and instill a sense of gravity to the story (he makes us care). This is a powerful movie that will have people talking well after they finished watching it.

A

A-

Well, that was fantastic. I actually liked the entire movie, first half and second. I thought the first did a very good job with it's dialouge, setting up this storyline and what is happening between these characters, while the ending obviously had the big thing with the ring, which was perfect. Jonathan Rhys-Meyers was great, while Scarlett was...well, not terrible. She had her moments of glory, though some fell flat. Maybe if she had played someone British like everyone else, she would've fit in better. Anyways, obviously the screenplay was among the best of the year, and I'd rank the movie as one of the top ten also.

The movie could have felt disjointed with the two halves, but I also thought it worked out nicely.

Glad I'm not the only one who felt that way.

I liked it.

The movie slowly grew on me. I especially liked the comparisons between Chris and Rashkliniklov that occured during the dream sequence at the end Solid B, would have been an A- but the first half is rather slow.

I never caught that, but now that you mentions it, it kind of did feel like Crime and Punishment, in that regard.

Kinda of? It was a full blown allusion. Did you notice that Chris was actually reading Crime and Punishment at the beginning of the film?

And sleeping on the couch.

So I watched some of Allens film and decided to check some of them out (watching Midnight in Paris next)...


This was a very good thriller, rather generic at first and then its goes "Its gone crazy son" in a instant...

Very interesting film with great characters.

B+

Match Point

Just watching this. I got the feeling I had seen it before (or at least some scenes). It is brilliant, and I have wanted to see it for a long time. Scarlett Johansson is fantastic! It's as if as her career moves on she loses the ability to act. Emily Mortimer and Matthew Goode also shine as silver spooned siblings. These three especially (but everyone really) shit all over Jonathan Rhys Meyers, who simply cannot act to save his life. By the end, I had gotten used to his performance, but he was terrible. Too rigid, too much like a mannequin for the most part. But anyway, the film is great. Brian Cox also stood out. The film is very operatic, and it uses London (its setting and lifestyle feeling) very well. Match Point is Woody Allen at his best - it may be for London what Manhattan is for New York City.

Oh, and I loved all of the smaller roles played by great British actors; Ewan Bremner and James Nesbitt as detectives, Alexander Armstrong as the tennis club manager, Mark Gatiss in a blink and you'll miss it table tennis scene early on, Toby Kebbell as the police officer, Paul Kaye as the estate agent etc.

A-

Glad you loved it. You should watch Allen's similar (and brilliant) Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Yeah. I saw that Crimes and Misdemeanors is quite similar when checking up on Match Point after watching it. I actually want to watch all of Allen's films. Every one I watch, I usually enjoy, but that is not always true of his older ones, so I prefer to pick 1990s or later. Crimes and Misdemeanors is close enough.