Sombras y niebla

Another mid-career Allen film unfairly dismissed both by critics and (I must admit) myself at the time of it's release. Sometimes with great filmmakers, we get spoiled and anything flawed or less than pure genius gets maligned for being weaker than that filmmaker's very best work instead of being appreciated for being miles ahead of most of the films that get made.

I was shocked at how much better I liked this on a recent re-viewing almost 20 years after seeing it in the theater. Yes, the super-star cameos still seem a bit distracting and self-serving, but nowhere near as much as in 1992. Yes, some plot elements work better than others, the ending is kind of clunky, etc. But this is still a great-looking, visually dense film, that manages to tread (most of the time) a very difficult tightrope of being funny and playful, while still exploring disturbing themes of paranoia, guilt, crowd mentality, religion, etc. Certainly not a great film, but a brave one more worthy of being enjoyed for it's strengths than attacked for its admitted shortcomings.

After completing Shadows and Fog, I found myself once again dismayed by the common claim that Woody Allen makes the same type of film over and over again. In reality, Woody has always been open to trying new and untested things both with his narrative structure and his filmmaking style. Shadows and Fog is another perfect example of Woody's penchant for diverse filmmaking. The 1991 film was Woody Allen's gentle homage to German Expressionism. Shadows and Fog pairs Woody Allen and Mia Farrow in a shadowy town that hides from a strangler that is on the loose. As is the usual Woody Allen film, Shadows and Fog is as wonderfully comedic as it is a thoughtful exercise in grappling with life's deepest questions.

Kleinman (Woody Allen) is a nebbish, nervous bookkeeper who has been pulled into a plot by a group of vigilantes to hunt for a strangler that has been terrorizing their area. A perpetually nervous individual, Kleinman wants nothing to do with a group of lawless men seeking out a murderer. Kleinman would rather stay locked in his apartment safely away from the murderer roaming the streets. To make matters worse, despite the fact that Kleinman has been roped into a group of vigilantes, information about his role in the group is being withheld from him. Sheepishly attempting to find his role within the vigilante group, all the while desperately trying to avoid putting himself in real danger, Kleinman encounters a woman in a traveling circus, Irmy (Mia Farrow) who is also attempting to find her way through life in a much more metaphorical sense. Kindred spirits, Kleinman and Irmy attempt to find a purpose for their lives, all the while trying to save them.

Shadows and Fog works perfectly as a nod to German Expressionism, with gorgeous imagery reminiscent of the greats of the genre such as Robert Wiene and Fritz Lang. Woody Allen's frequent use of black and white photography well into the 90's is a fearless maneuver that deserves uproarious applause. Woody is a filmmaker that uses a variety of film technique achieving artistic significance yet is hardly acknowledged for that. Certain aspects Woody is commonly acknowledged for are present in Shadows and Fog, for instance, it is exquisitely written and has a brilliant sound design. Shadows and Fog is another worthy mention in my crusade to prove that Woody Allen is not a filmmaker that has a clear section of "lower-tier" work, as he is often accused.

I like Woody Allen's "Shadows and Fog" and I think it is seriously underrated. Shot in a beautiful B/W this surreal Comedy / Mystery / Drama / Thriller takes place in a small town somewhere in the Eastern Europe between two World Wars where a mysterious maniac stranglers the people all over the town. Since the local police proved to be helpless, the citizens form vigilance committees and a small timid insignificant bookkeeper Kleinman (his name is translated as "Little Man") is recruited to search for a murderer in the dark night full of shadows and fog. Allen parodies German Expressionists (Fritz Lang), Franz Kafka, and Ingmar Bergman ("Magician") in this funny, scary, warm, dark, surreal, and dramatic film that he saw as a metaphor for humanity, as we all muddle through the murk and attempt to find meaning. The cast is all brilliant and includes Mia Farrow, John Malkovich, Madonna, David Ogden Stiers, Michael Kirby, John Cusack, John C. Reilly. Lily Tomlin, Jodie Foster, and Kathy Bates appeared in the cameos playing prostitutes in the local brothel. I was especially impressed by John Malkovich - never expected him be as tender as in the final scene.

Shadows and fog are everywhere in Shadows and Fog, one of Woody's most visually impressive pieces. One of his better chosen casts as well. (Check out William H Macy in a brief bit as a cop) Full of big ideas and classic comic bits, including all the great scenes at the brothel. Once again Woody's love of magic plays a part in the story. Some of his best zingers, too ( "They say a deranged killer has the strength of 10 men... I have the strength of a very small boy... with polio" -now that's funny.)Each character, main or brief, has a nice moment on screen, especially Julie Kavner in her best Marge Simpson voice playing Kleinman's bitter ex fiancee. She's hilarious. Loathe him or admire him: Allen always makes you think.

I just saw `Shadows and Fog' for the first time this weekend, and while I can't say that it immediately became my favorite Woody Allen film, I did find it a very thoughtful and interesting film (not really a comedy), and an exceptionally beautiful film to look at.

I know this is frowned upon at the IMDb, but a lengthy and very negative review on this page of `Shadows and Fog,' along with a critique of Woody Allen in general, has gotten my dander up, and I felt like putting in my two cents. Why on earth should I, or any film lover, care about how successful a film is financially? Why should I care if a majority of movie patrons like a director's films or not? From my perspective, some of the stupidest trash makes the most money and sells the most tickets. Sure, I liked Jurassic Park -- saw it several times at the cinema, bought the video -- but not because of how much money it made, or how many other people were going to see it. It was because it was fun, and I liked it. Does that mean I should damn more esoteric directors (like Woody Allen) to oblivion? There are directors whose work I don't always understand, but God bless them, if they have the opportunity and the drive to get their cinematic vision realized, more power to them. I don't necessarily have to like their work, or go to see it. But on the whole, I'd rather be talked-up-to then talked-down-to, and being a little confused by a film has never permanently damaged anyone, so far as I know.

So calm down out there, you art-house-haters! It's just entertainment. Read your 20th century history. Limiting entertainment to its lowest common denominator has been tried and tried. No good has ever come of it, to my knowledge.

And incidentally, if you have a predilection for Woody Allen films, and like the look of old black and white expressionist cinema, give `Shadows and Fog' a look. It would maybe kill you?