rsmz

Despite all the acusations, I still respect Woody Allen as one of the greatest filmmakers. I've seen many of his comedies multiple times, even some of the more recent ones. I even saw him do stand up a long time ago.

Perhaps he set such an incredibly high standard for humor that I cannot find much enthusiasm for his dramatic works, and this is no exception.

Here we have concept that the same story can be told as a comedy or a trajedy. It's two sides of the same coin. Unfortunatly, in this case, one side is far superior to the other. It's like Michael Joran playing basketball and Michecl Jordan playing baseball - you're not starting such a debate on even footing.

I enjoyed the comedy, especially from Will Farrell playing the Woody Allen role brilliantly - he had the tone, the voice , and the mannerisms of Woody down to a science. Even when Woody's not in his films someone is playing his part.

The tragic version seemed very forced - let's just focus on death and death again and poof we have a tragic story. Or not. There was nothing pulling at the heartstrings... possibly becaue we were back in the comedy in short order.

The balance of the two styles and how they were blended into one film was quite awkward and occassionally confusing.

Interesting experiment, nonetheless, but pitting funny Woody Allen against dramatic Woody Allen is not fair.

First, it's widely know in the world of comedy (real comedy) that the phrases "dark" comedy or "uncomfortable" comedy are used by people who are not inherently funny as a mask, or excuse, for unfunny movies. Perhaps getting stung by a bee on your eyelid is a lot funnier than it sounds. Oh wait - it's not.

Borat was dark comedy if you wan to use such a label - this film is just plain weak. Like him or not, Woody Allen is inhreently funny, as is Larry David, the Zuckers, the Farrelly Brothers and going back a bit Monty Python were inhreently funny. Alexander Payne is not - although Sideways was a terrific movie.

Then there are the issues with the story. First off, how do we accept this straightlaced, un-sexy, goody-good-teen Tracy, as someone who had an affair with her teacher? Nothing else in the movie even remotely puts her character in that light. Even Resse Witherspoon isn't that good an actress (and she is excellent).

And what's with the young lsbian - again it has nothing to do with the film or did it check the box Gay/Lesbian character?

There are also too many ome-dimentional characters in the film for no reason - all of the men working in the school offices are typically seen standing around as if they are waiting for someone to hand them their next lines in the film - which never come.

And on and on it goes.

Yes, the thin storyline will keep you watching but at the end you'll wonder why.

I respect the two stars so I give the move 5 out of 10 but this is not a "real" comedy, it's more of the freeze-dried type you have to put in the microwave and hope something funny pops out.

This is simply bad television. Clearly Tina Fay worked hard on this show. After all, it takes a special skill to make both Ted Danson and Holly Hunter look like blithering idiots in one series - yes Tina you made that happen by using taking Mean Girls to the streets of Los Angeles with each and every character. The only saving grace of the show - and perhaps the only one Tina can truly write for is Kyla Kennedy as the teen gitl Orly. Sprinkled with occasional, misfired, attempts at humor, this show is a mess.