My wife, who is perhaps Thailand’s biggest Woody Allen fan, was especially impressed with that point, because it’s what I myself have always pressed home to her from the early days of our relationship. It’s easy to pine for the Good Ol’ Days, but back in the Good Ol’ Days was someone else pining for a previous time. The time’s the present, I’ve always told her. (I think we’ve had threads on this.) And then there it is from Woody himself.
As for Hemingway, I laughed out loud when he first appeared and said to Own Wilson somehting like: “You’ve read my book.” Book. Singular. Hah!
OK. It never occurred to me that this might just be a hallucination by him. And even now that you’ve raised the suggestion, I can’t buy it. The time trips are magic, and lose every bit of glamour with a hallucination explanation. Allen has done magic before - Purple Rose of Cairo, Zelig - and this fits right in. It’s as much a major theme of his as infidelity. Well, close.
Huh. I don’t actually remember the Sheen character saying that - I just remember him pretending to be all-knowing about Paris and the arts. Thanks!
Reminds me of the Lord High Executioner’s song in G&S The Mikado, lampooning “The idiot who praises with enthusiastic tone / all centuries but this, and every country but his own.”
Yeah, that’s one of the things I really liked about this movie - he actually was going back in time. It would seem like a cop-out if it was all in his head.
Agreed. As an intellectual concept, it’s easy to say “Of course!” But actually staying present, without living in the past or projecting into the future, is almost impossible to do or sustain for very long. It’s a universal form of escapism.
I wonder if the flapper who stayed in La Belle Epoque was happy with her choice? Me, if I went into the past, I’d miss modern plumbing, medicine, comfortable shoes and clothing, and the freedoms women have today.
I don’t think it was all in his head, but I also don’t think it was actually back into the real past either. Some kind of fuzzy simulacrum that combined the reality of the past with his perception of the past.
Put me (and the wife) down as someone who thinks he really went back into the past. Just one of those movie anomalies that are never explained, like the repeating days in Groundhog Day. I love those!
I know, like I said, fuzzy. But if that was the real past then the characters were horribly written caricatures. So I’d much prefer it be some blending of reality and his psyche.
Which would lead her back to the Etruscans, the last time women had acknowledged social and political power in southern Europe. Oh, and they went topless. The ideal state.
Nation-state, of course. What did you think I meant?
I don’t think it was a hallucination either, I think he was really going back in time. The confusion was that, maybe I’m wrong, but it seemed as if you thought ftg was calling Woody Allen a “hack” as a writer, when he was talking about the Owen Wilson character being a hack, which he was. He being the Owen Wilson character and was being a hack.
Ok, now I’m all confused. Now I don’t really know what either one of you meant. But anyway, I don’t think it was a hallucination.
oh so that’s why the diary was in there! I thought it a very jarring note that while wandering past a book stall he finds a diary of a relatively unknown professional mistress to the stars.
of course he also changed history by taking her back in time and leaving her, the diary should end at that point. of course the movie does not make it clear how you move back and forth through time. The detective followed him but went to a differnt time and place (in his own vehicle bet that was a shock!) and apparently could not return even though he wanted to while Marion’s character thought she could stay in Belle Epoque even though Owen’s charavcter was not able to stay in the 20’s. I thought it was his intent that caused him to leave ie he left to get his manuscript which is in the now so he left the 20’s but if the etective could not return with intent maybe not.
Another interesting point to me was time flowed differntly. One night Marion has left Picasso and flown off with Hemingway to Mount Kilamanjaro, the followiing night (in Owen time) she has returned and Stine says she has been back for awhile.
Part of the charm for me is how these issues occur without any explanation. A lesser film would have to cobble together some sort of answer for all that, while this one, like Groundhog Day (which I learned from a director’s interview did have a cheesy explanation for all that happened, a hex by a wronged co-worker who just happened to be a witch, that was cut out) does not.
OK, I’m really late to this party; but here I am nonetheless. My wife and I saw this last night on cable. Man, what a good movie. It was one of those that I was always a little bit interested to see; but not quite enough to plunk down money on another questionable Woody Allen movie. What’s most amazing is that apparently I never paid enough attention to what it was about. Going into the movie I thought it was about how Rachel McAdams character and Owen Wilson’s Character find out that they’re not meant for each other by hanging meeting another couple who are reverse mirror images. In other words Rachel McAdams falls for the douche bag, and Owen falls for douche bag’s girlfriend.
OK, I’ll make an effort to watch Midnight in Paris; I’ll check On Demand, but can still order DVD’s from Netflix.
I’d been reminded of the movie because of comparisons with one of my very favorites: Alan Rudolph’s The Moderns (1988). The part of “Paris” is played by Montreal, but the music & art evoke the period magically. Witty dialog–with a convincing Gertrude Stein & a hilarious Hemingway parody. Streaming on Netflix…
