A review for Midnight in Paris requires no preamble simply because it’s the best movie Woody Allen has made in years, which alone should be sufficient reason to watch it in light of the director’s limp and joyless recent output. But a review that begins with the suggestion that Midnight in Paris far exceeds the praise worthiness of, say, Vicky Christina Barcelona also damns Allen’s latest film with faint praise. Fortunately, Midnight in Paris stands head and shoulders above most of what Allen has offered in the last decade because it’s a truly wonderful picture on its own merits and not because it happens to crest the director’s latter-day missteps by minor jumps in quality.
Allen’s playing with magical realism in his narrative, in the form of a cab which whisks away Gil Pender (Owen Wilson in an excellent turn as the Allen surrogate du jour) to the 1920s. As one might gather from the title, the setting is Paris, and the device allows Gil to rub elbows with the great artistic minds of the era, from Ernest Hemingway (Corey Stoll) to Man Ray (Tom Cordier). Appropriately, Gil’s a writer himself, though the film establishes that he only recently in life has begun striving for genuine artistic achievement after spending his career as a hack screenwriter in Hollywood; his late-bloomer development earns reactions fluctuating between incredulous and scornful from his dismissive fiance Inez (Rachel McAdams), as well as her parents (Kurt Fuller and Mimi Kennedy) and her pretentious know-it-all friend Paul (Michael Sheen).
Midnight in Paris doesn’t require much heavy lifting from its audience, but I think it’s a mistake to equate light storytelling with a lack of depth or subtext. Allen’s film very much remains packed with meaning but never does a moment go by where the search for interpretive meaning takes precedent over enjoying the way the director deploys his narrative. There’s a definite sense that he’s not trying to make a statement with his film as much as he’s just trying to tell a good story artfully and vividly as well as pay tribute to one of the world’s great cities across two very distinct time periods.
Undeniably, he succeeds; Paris is as much a character here as Gil, and Allen takes great care to make us familiar with the city from the moments the opening credits, being a montage of establishing shots taken throughout the city of light, start rolling. For those who have visited Paris, the experience may well be transporting; for those of us who have never set foot in its streets, Allen expertly defines Paris’ geography with beautiful precision and makes it not only comprehensible as a location but even familiar. For both audience demographics, Allen gives Paris life through his camera, and it becomes a living, breathing organism rather than a collection of stone, mortar, and aged opulence.
Allen’s also tipping his hat to the literary and artistic figures Gil encounters as he carouses across town with the Fitzgeralds, F. Scott and Zelda (Tom Hiddleston and Alison Pill), Cole Porter, Salvador Dali (Adrien Brody), and innumerable others. Indeed, the name-dropping here almost becomes exhausting at a certain point, but I can see that being the intent as our audience identification character, Gil, is himself overwhelmed by the number of 1920s society cultural luminaries he meets each time he hops in the cab and time warps. Truthfully there’s some fun to be had in playing “Where’s Waldo?” and counting off how many of them you recognize, and I actually wonder if Allen maybe was also aiming to foster a sense of discovery in the 1920s scenes. Regardless, he’s painting each character in broad strokes, but this makes sense given that this is Gil’s story and can’t accommodate nuanced portrayals of the represented icons. Think of the iconic traits that mark them, and that’s about as far as their characterizations go, with effective results– Stoll’s Hemingway in particular is a work of inspired genius.
I think Midnight in Paris is an ode to these supporting players and their time period first and foremost, but there’s an interesting bit of subtext regarding critical interpretation, specifically comparing the cold, purely scholarly and thoroughly rehearsed intellectualism espoused by the aforementioned Paul, and Gil’s bursting and infectious enthusiasm for the arts. In showcasing Paul’s undeniably impressive knowledge, the film actually underscores the failings of a critical approach in which analysis is formed based not on the individual’s personal reaction to a work of art but rather the recitation of facts and knowledge composed by other critics; Paul appreciates Picasso’s paintings based on what he’s read in a book more than for the feelings they elicit in him. Gil admittedly has an unfair advantage here since he gets to meet face to face with Picasso himself, but the time traveling cab can serve as a metaphor for how Gil’s unrestrained passion for the arts allows him to experience them in a way Paul can’t and yields insights superior to those of the better educated but joyless man. Truthfully, this is sort of a half-baked thesis, but it’s one that I had rolling around in my head after watching the film and one I might come back to in an essay one of these days– if the theme is secondary, it’s still there, and worth thinking about and exploring in the future.
Midnight in Paris obviously worked for me. Truly great Allen is hard to come by these days, and he’s turned out a really wonderful, endlessly jubilant celebration of an era and a collection of essential writers, poets, filmmakers, painters, and songwriters that works as a total story and not just a self-indulgent bit of homage. It’s also a great turnaround for Wilson, whose jittery neurotic tendencies fit the archetypal Allen protagonist but whose charm and attitude leave his character and performance feeling distinct nonetheless. I’m behind on my movies so far this year, but I can definitely peg this as one of my favorites of 2011 to date; Allen’s made a movie that’s breezy and pleasant to sit through, but one that ultimately resonates and feels profound even in its simplicity and its easiness.
I really liked this film as well – his best work since “Match Point’ in my opinion.
Great site you have here, keep up the good work!
Thanks a lot Sam, the feedback is very much appreciated. And I agree, this is Allen in fine form after the muddled Vicky Christina Barcelona and, I’m told, You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger.
Absolutely loved Midnight in Paris myself (saw it twice). So charming and whimsical you can’t help but have a smile on your face the entire time. Such a wonderful film!
I felt the same way! I couldn’t stop grinning the entire time.
This is such a delight to watch and Allen really does have a burning passion for the city of LOVE. I could tell that he did from this material and it seems like every chance he got, he showed what Owen Wilson could do as a funny man. Good Review Andrew!
Pingback: Review: Midnight in Paris, 2011, dir. Woody Allen (via Andrew At The Cinema) | Greg Whalen's Infinite Loop
Love your interpretation of the meaning behind Gil and Paul. It’s hard to believe there are people who would attempt to correct a tour guide. Especially when they are that qualified.
Dan, I felt that love for Paris come through, too. Makes me want to hop on a plane back to Europe to experience it for myself!
Fitz, thanks– I was struck by the relationship between the two characters and their respective critical personae almost immediately, but I still feel like I need to work out the interpretation a bit more. But I agree, it’s kind of astounding that anyone would have the gall to interrupt their tour guide and correct them when they clearly have a strong idea of what they’re talking about.
I agree on liking that interpretation. Although I definitely didn’t see the twist ending coming with him – or as Kathy Bates would call him, “the real pedantic fellow.”
Thanks very much Marshall. I can only assume the twist you’re referring to is the affair he has with Inez, and I actually wasn’t that surprised to find that the two of them had a tryst together– she’s not obviously head-over-heels crushing on him, but there’s a nuanced attraction present in how she speaks about him that suggests potential for infidelity the longer the movie goes on and the larger the rift between her and Gil grows. Still something of a shock, though.
This seems lovely. Allen is trying his hardest to hit that perfection note isn’t he! At least he can revel on this being his highest grossin in .. well decades. This is only coming out here in August so will have to wait for quite a while still.
Well, only about a month at this point! I hope you enjoy it when you get to see it– it’s a really great movie, and I think shows what Allen can do when he knows what kind of story he wants to tell and how he wants to tell it.
It was so joyous. I am sad I did not see it a second time in theaters.
Yeah, agreed. I’ll probably get it on NetFlix once it’s available, I really, really liked it.
Pingback: 2011: Retrospective, Honors, & ACVF’s Top 15 (Pt.2) « A Constant Visual Feast