Scenes from a Mall

Some films make the viewer a participant. Others make the viewer, well, a viewer. Others make the viewer a voyeur. SCENES FROM A MALL makes the viewer a third wheel. A very uncomfortable position to be in.

Like in real life, the third wheel is the poor schmuck who innocently accompanies a couple on a date or dinner or whatever and often ends up being less a companion than a witness, or worse, a referee, when a lovers' spat breaks out. In such a situation, all one can do is to keep looking at one's watch, pretend that there is nothing wrong and, above all else, don't get involved.

When it was announced that SCENES FROM A MALL would pair Bette Midler and Woody Allen together as a bickering couple who spend the day at the mall, I couldn't help but smile. Bette and Woody married, what a great idea. They both seem so different, yet so perfect together. And to their credit, they do have great chemistry here. They click. And they are certainly convincing as a couple with a whole boat load of marital issues. Maybe too convincing. What could have been an amusing thread of a story if interwoven into a larger tapestry becomes instead a tiresome ordeal. Woody and Bette argue and bicker and insult and break up and kiss and make up and argue and bicker and insult some more. Their day-long excursion to the mall to do Christmas shopping becomes an extended primal therapy session. Despite the best efforts of the two stars, what begins as an amusing domestic comedy rapidly become just plain annoying.

The fault lies with writer/director Paul Mazursky, whose films -- good, bad or indifferent -- seldom have a strong focus and tend to ramble shamelessly. It is a style of film-making that, in theory, tries to represent realism, but in practice it violates the conventions of what we accept as film reality -- reelity, so to speak. Mazursky's films always tend to look and feel like rehearsals, not a finished production.

This film has it assets. Woody and Bette, of course. And the recreation of a California mall, mostly filmed on a New York soundstage is quite convincing (though how many malls feature ballroom dancing?). SCENES FROM A MALL looks right and is acted just right, but in the end, this trip to the mall wears you out, leaving you just wanting to go home.

He lives in Southern California. He spends time in a mall. He carries a surfboard. He wears a ponytail. Is this really Woody Allen, or an imposter? This movie received a critical beating when it came out, but it's really not that bad. In fact, I sort of got a kick out of seeing Woody in this. He is well matched by Bette Midler, who reprises her Down and Out in Beverly Hills character. Director Paul Mazursky, who usually makes either Southern California or Manhattan-set social comedies, brings Woody out to the Beverly Hills that he's trashed in so many movies (the most obvious being Annie Hall), and plucks him into the center of '80s and '90s California consumerism--the mall. The story involves Allen and Midler discussing their infidelities in various mall settings, but the dialogue is merely a clothesline for the idea. It was a hard idea to pull off, but I, being the Woody Allen fan that I am, enjoyed it.

Even though the movie is pretty much everything that Woody Allen is not, it's still somewhat enjoyable to see him paired with the amazing Bette Midler. The story is interesting to say the very least: it's their anniversary, and Nick (Allen) decides to share a secret. It so happens that they are located in a mall, and the drama is surrounded and contrasted by hundreds of neons, stores, billboards, colors, and excitement. In the midst of all this, a life shared for years is crumbling down, as Nick is not the only one with a secret. The movie, being interesting as it is, has its flaws. The dynamic between Deb (Midler) and Nick is sometimes unbearable as it shifts drastically from one side to another. They are both on two separate rollercoasters, and it's can be annoying. Perhaps the most charming feature is its never-ending symbolism. Every little thing can be interpreted as many different things in the movie, and I don't think the movie should be taken in as it is. There are many interesting aspects in the movie, and as always, Woody Allen delivers with his almost-there-over-the-top performance. All in all, it's probably not the easiest and not the best thing Allen has been a part of, but it's still worth it to see him yelling and talking about sex...because it always is.

One word that describes the movie for me is frustrating. Though the setting might be a rather original idea, it falls short on the plot and characters. For me, the couple are not convincing. They seem to different, a clingy, weak, uncool attorney married to a strong, manipulative and insightful woman. Whilst, Woody totally destroys any dignity and self respect for himself, Bette, seems to be constantly boosting her ego with more and more manipulation.

Another flaw is that the setting works against it. At times, i must admit they fit the criteria for a realistic approach of those couples who argue at shopping centre's so loudly, the whole idea in itself removes the realism from it. Though this is comedy, the mime, for me is straight up an irritation.

There just seems to be no character development and that's what the whole film has tried to fit into. The plot is written to suit the insight of a couple who play mind games on each other constantly, and for me falls short.

Director Paul Mazursky is always at his best when satirizing trendy Southern California lifestyles, and he does so here from that most quintessential Southern California setting: the shopping mall, where Bette Midler and Woody Allen break up and reconcile over the afternoon of their 16th wedding anniversary. The windy script was obviously written with Allen in mind, but the New York comedian is just as clearly out of his element playing a nouveau-riche, pony-tailed attorney with a taste for sushi and frozen yogurt. The sheer novelty value of such unlikely miscasting is irresistible, especially with the typically neurotic Allen paired (for once) against a co-star as extroverted as Midler, more or less reprising her role from Mazursky's 'Down and Out in Beverly Hills' (1986). But the film never rises to the laugh-riot level expected from the talent involved: it's a claustrophobic, one-act, two-character comedy, no less thin and shallow than the LA culture it mocks, and often pointless except as a vehicle for its two bankable stars. Imagine the film with two unknown actors in the same roles, and it all but disappears off the screen.