Directs and writes a movie per year with no exceptions

He uses the medium as an excuse to express his opinions on modern art and intellectual pursuits in general, and occasionally love. The stories of his movies are often copies of his other movies,

I disagree, I really enjoyed Cafe Society and Irrational Man, thought they were some of the better movies he's done in the last decade.

Blue Jasmine was far superior to Irrational Man

That's how movies should be done, not as a corporate and sterile pop culture pandering products.

I agree with you, though in my opinion his best movies were the ones that dare to be different, like Zelig and Purple Rose of Cairo.

By writing the same movie every year

By being obsessed with and living for the craft. A true artist.

He said he's never had writer's block in his life. Bad Woody Allen movies are still pretty good desu.

not particularly if you know what you're doing

Not that user but your cattiness ITT reads as pathetic

He probably has at least a half dozen assistants who take care of all the logistics like locations and casting. I wouldn't be surprised if he only shows up to the first unit.

I've recently watched Match Point (Allen himself said it's one of his best), and it didn't feel like an Allen movie at all. The dialogue was a bit bland and feels a bit overstretched. Decent concept, but it could've been done a bit better.

Favorite movie of his is still Manhatten.

How does he find the time between all the kid fucking?

So does any director? I do know he takes a hand in casting especially his principal actors.It's pretty amazing if he's built up the kind of trusting relationships where he can just sit back and write/direct while all of the boring shit is handled.

Purple Rose of Cairo>Manhattan>Play it Again, Sam (his funniest)

I enjoyed it. I wouldn't call it his best by any stretch but it wasn't bad.

Fuck this guy. The most overrated person in the history of all and ever.

kek i love hyperbole, it's everything

>simple plot
>simple dialogue
>soundtrack that is just there
>bland directing
>can't even be fucked with proper credits sequence

I take a shit everyday, but nobody makes threads about that

it wasn't bad, but it feels like it's missing something.
certainly not one of his movies I would be itching to rewatch years from now.

He didn't direct Play It Again, Sam

Match Point is a glorified tv movie filled with actors that belong in that medium, I'm baffled with its acclaim.

yeah I see what you mean, it did feel like it was something holding it back from really being as good as it could have been. I'd give it a 7/10.

h always has a "little" help

He marries her even though she's old and ugly, so I don't think he's a pedo, just has a really fucking weird relationship with his adopted stepdaughter.

>neurotic protagonist
>quirky female as his love interest
>jazz soundtrack

Which of his movies am I talking about? First answer receives Reddit Gold

Radio Days?

For the most part that isn't really saying much

How about anything directed by a guy with the surname Anderson

He's done lots of experimental stuff also that is nothing like anything else made. Watch Zelig, that has none of those.

It has a neurotic protagonist and a quirky love interest.

He fixates on a young actress, then writes a shitty movie so he can cast her and be near her. Lust is probably the second biggest motivator there is - just behind hate.

what's wrong with adopted love?

>Midnight in Paris
>Blue Jasmine

>Mediocre

His movies over the last few years have been better than most his 90's/early 2000's stuff.

Though he seems to have a record of every other movie he does being bad. But when making a movie every year that's not really that bad.

Most of his movies are the same thing every time, and not very adventurous, he rarely makes anything new or truly exceptional

His movies are all the same

they are below average romantic "comedies". He just changes the setting and names of the characters and calls it a new movie