Copeland starts off by saying that when filmmakers grew up as film-watchers they don’t create films about the “real world,” but a world “mediated” through other films.  He claims that George Lucas’s Star Wars “makes so many references to earlier films and styles that it could just as easily – and perhaps more accurately – been called ‘Genre Wars.’”  Many young directors from this era (the mid-seventies) such as Lucas and Scorsese create films out of nostalgia for Hollywood’s past.   He says that the first filmmakers to make films that dealt with reality as much as they did with old films were French new wave filmmakers such as Truffaut and Godard.  He says it is no mistake that these great filmmakers were well versed in the history of cinema and spent their early careers as film critics.  Copeland calls the films by Scorsese and Lucas the “Americanizing of the New Wave sensibility.”
    Allen according to Copeland is “not as cinematically knowledgeable” as his counterparts from the era.  However, he discusses all of the points from Allen’s films in which he references other great films of the past.  He discusses the references to Bergman, Eisenstein and Bogart in his various films from the seventies.  The references in films to other films trickle down into our daily lives, which creates a world where not all of our actions are necessarily original.  In some ways, many of us emulate our favorite characters in films; it’s not just great directors copying other directors, but people copying their favorite characters.  Past artwork has become the foundation for which new artists can build. These ideas being recycled through film and our daily lives creates a new mythology.
    Woody Allen draws from the ideas of past works to mold them into his films.  Love and Death is no exception.  It builds upon ideas of past filmmakers and intertwines them into parody.  Even though many of the ideas and scenes in the film seem ridiculous, it takes an intelligent viewer to read beyond the laughs and into the past artists that shaped them.

    Schein wants to make sure that the reader understands that his article is not speaking of “the humor typified by physiological reflexes such as smiling or the gleam in the eye.  This article deals only with the kind of humor that releases laughter.”(24)  The film humor genre may have begun with the Lumiere Brothers film about the gardener.  It has evolved away from its sadistic beginnings, but much of the humor that is still present involves maliciousness.  Schein claims that humor depends on the audaciousness of the humorist and how much a person can identify with the victim.  “Humor’s first rule is that the humorist may lose neither his tempo nor his temper.”(27)  One area of humor in film that Schein discusses is the parody.  He says that “to parody a film in a film presents enormous possibilities.”(31)  In contrast, he says that to parody a novel in a film is very difficult and can leave the viewer in “a blind alley.”(31)  
    Schein analyzes the qualities of humor and tactics used by such film humorists as Tati, Chaplin and the Marx brothers.  Of all of their styles he seems to enjoy Tati’s the most.  Schein comments that the film’s humor works with predominantly visual material that seems to be purely intellectual at the same time.  Every sequence in the movies also contains many formal associations.  Tati combines these factors with “a casual nonchalance that is master proof of a humorist.”(32)
    Harry Schein would have liked the humor in Love and Death for a variety of reasons.  The film does not simply make the viewer smile to himself, but it contains many moments of hilarity that force the viewer into convulsions of laughter.  Allen’s film never loses its tempo and provides many situations in which the viewer is able to relate to Boris as a victim.  Tati’s style of comedy is emulated by Love and Death.  The film at its base contains the visuals of Tolstoy’s Russia and uses this as a springboard for intellectual conversation and humor.  These factors combined with the references and associations that Allen makes to many other works yield what would be “master proof” to Schein that the film is a great work of humor.

    According to Kiremidjian a parody must have three basic characteristics of structure and behavior.  First, a parody must originate from the original in its form and content and focus on the duality between the two.  Second, it must raise the question as to how the original relates with the parody.  The viewer must be forced to think about how the aesthetics of one relate to the other and whether or not the viewer receives something from the new version.  The third point is that in the Aristotelian sense parody is not really art.  (It imitates another work, not real life.)  This is problematic for the author, who arrives at the idea that parody imitates art, which in turn reveals something about the original piece.  He exclaims that parody does indeed become an art form in its ability to examine the original piece and exploits it for the purpose of self-exploration and curiosity.
    Once Kiremidjian establishes that parody is indeed an art form that can be benefited from he examines what makes for a good parody.  He states that an artist “must grasp the essentials of the style of a given author or a school of authors, and then proceed to concoct an outlandish episode which is expressed in that style.”(235)  Parody must then act as a critique of some sort of the original work.  This can only be done effectively, if the artist has a strong grasp of the original work(s) and has a purpose for creating the parody.  
    Following the philosophical logic of Kiremidjian, Allen’s Love and Death indeed qualifies as art and as a parody.  The film manages to provide the viewer with the impression that Allen has a strong grasp for every facet of the works he is parodying.  The references to a multitude of works are clear.  His critique of these works emanate a sense of purpose with humor that is clearly outlandish in its content.

    This book attempts to chronicle film comedy from the silent era all the way through the end of the 1970s(when the book was published.)  The work covers the first crude attempts at humor by Edison and Lumiere through Allen’s Annie Hall.  Mast analyzes the different structures, techniques and values that have transformed cinematic comedy over time.  He discusses the evolution of these techniques and how they appear and reappear in various pieces throughout silent and more modern film.
    Mast claims that while some film comics like Mel Brooks simply move from one parody to the next, Allen has transformed his comedic style from the purely parodic to a more personal, psychological and emotional film style.  Allen’s films are more “French than American” in that they are “very conscious of themselves as conceptions for the film medium.”(313)  According to Mast, Allen’s films are a mix between the “anarchic clown tradition” of the American style and the “ironic tradition”(313) of the French.  Allen balances the line between “intellectual awareness, psychological astuteness” and the bizarre gag and parody.  Mast argues that each of the main characters in Allen’s films, are essentially all the same because they display those same features no matter what situation they are thrown into.  
    Recurring themes in Allen’s films include, neuroticism, sexual desire and self-discovery.  Each of these themes get examined from a serious tone, but in films such as Love and Death, these serious ideas become the butt of many jokes.  Mast continues to say that these topics continually develop in Allen’s later films as the director continues to explore himself.  The psychoanalysis that Allen undertakes and his new understanding of himself provides for more humorous and profound ideas in his later films.

    The main work that Allen seizes his material from is Tolstoy’s War and Peace.  The title alone, Love and Death, is a clear parody of this work, but the inspiration dives much deeper.  Tolstoy’s novel examines the actual role of leaders in large events such as war and how much impact they could possibly have on specific occurrences.  The role of speeches and words is touched upon by Tolstoy as well.  Tolstoy’s novel focuses on ideas regarding free will and for what reasons men would go to fight a war behind a leader such as Napoleon.    Bencivenga also examines the use of Aristotelian syllogistic logic in the novel.  He claims that “Tolstoy rejects the practical syllogism as an explanation of individual or collective action.”(6)  
    Allen’s Love and Death intelligently uses many of the ideas from Tolstoy’s novel.  The film is a clever parody that is able to incorporate obvious ideas such as the title and war with Napoleon.  It explores further though to include Napoleon’s role in the war and the decisions at hand for the general.  There is a scene at the beginning of the film in which Allen parodies the lack of free will Boris has in his decision to go to war along with the exhilaration of his brothers at the prospect of fighting.  
    At many points in the film, Boris uses syllogisms to examine and parody life’s supposed truths.  For example, “A. Socrates is a man. B. All men are mortal. C. All men are Socrates.  That means all men are homosexuals.”  This ridiculous logic mocking syllogisms comes right after a much more coherent moral predicament in which Boris weighs the idea of murder on his conscience.  Allen manages to mock and satire different aspects of the writings of Tolstoy, even to the point of slapstick humor, but he combines the intelligence with comedy.

    As Ivan Ilych (the title character of Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilych) nears the end of his own life he wonders, “What is the right thing?”  After a life full of experience he realizes that he has not come close to understanding the meaning of life.  Before Ivan neared his untimely death, he lived an ordinary life that “flowed pleasantly.”  He never dealt with adversity and simply followed the path that was set out for him by his parents and society.  “Tolstoy shows that Ivan’s life, though simple and ordinary, was truly terrible because he had no sense of the tragic dimension of life.”(8)  The reader comes to understand that failure and inexplicable suffering happen whether a person has behaved rightly or not.  As Ivan lies in bed slowly dying of his illness he has two visitors.  His servant comes to visit him and teaches the reader that a common peasant is able to help Ivan even more than any doctor.  His son also comes to visit him and portrays how no one should have to suffer such a painful, unwarranted death.  This moment raises great questions about God’s will, destiny and justice.      

    As should be expected with a parody of Russian literature, Love and Death examines and satirizes many of these ideas.  Many scenes in the film analyze theories on death and dying, but after the death of Boris the viewer gains a glimpse into what life and death have taught the hero.  In The Death of Ivan Ilych the main character comes to the realization that he has learned nothing about morals or the true meaning of life.  In contrast, the parody these ideas show a character, Boris, with seeming omniscience flaunts such tidbits of knowledge like, “there are worse things in life than death…I mean if you’ve ever spent an evening with an insurance salesman, you know exactly what I mean.”  This film also provides a satire on the bedside drama that takes place in Tolstoy’s novels.  As opposed to meaningful events taking place that enlighten the hero to life’s truths; Boris encounters ridiculous people from his past.  One such person is Boris’s father who produces a package size parcel of land with a monopoly sized house on it and exclaims that he has finally built.

Love and Death is a 1975 film written and directed by Woody Allen. The film is a satirical take on Russian epic novels. It takes place in Russia during the Napoleonic wars. Boris played by Allen himself, is a coward and pacifist scholar who is forced to enlist in the Russian army. The film chronicles Boriss ridiculous experiences in the army, his marriage to his childhood love, Sonja (Diane Keaton), his attempted assassination of Napoleon and his eventual execution. The film is mainly a parody of Russian epic novels by Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, but it captures ideas and references to philosophy and film. The films humor is straightforward at times, but at others it relies on the viewer's knowledge of the original works being parodied. Allen's film attempts to derive the meaning of life (and death) through a combination of references to literature, film, philosophy and Allen's own quirky personality. This unique synthesis of ideas creates a hilarious film that relies heavily on parody. The film's outlandish ideology can be summed up by the following interaction between Boris and Sonja: "But judgment of any system or a priori relation of phenomena exists in any rational or metaphysical or at least epistemological contradiction to an abstract and empirical concept, such as being, or to be, or to occur in the thing itself or of the thing itself." - Sonja "Yes, I've said that many times." - Boris

Chapter 6: Love and Death (1975)

    This work analyzes the various themes that seem to be emulated in many of Woody Allen’s films.  Love and Death is an interesting film for this analysis because of how obviously he meant to parody Tolstoy’s War and Peace.  This theme gets fleshed out immediately in the title and Allen expounds on this idea amongst many others as the film progresses.  Lee points out that while the film is comedic at its core, (even slapstick at some points) it tackles many deep philosophical questions.  Allen clearly understands the philosophical contributions of many philosophers such as Hegel, Kant, Nietzsche and Kierkegaard.  In spite of this, Allen uses complex jargon to essentially say nothing.  The conversations are reminiscent of the great thinkers, but on their own the conversations boil down to “clever gibberish.”(31)  
    Lee claims that Allen is trying to illustrate in Love and Death and many of his other films that it is impossible to resolve the fundamental questions of human existence through abstract argument and theorizing.  These questions that Lee is referring to are common themes in Allen films including, the existence of God, death, ethics and relationships.  In this film Allen addresses each of these issues, but he never truly gives a coherent opinion on any one of them.  The only point at which Allen makes a moral decision is when he decides to not kill Napoleon – which would trigger the end of many wars and countless deaths.  The viewer never learns the reasoning behind his change of heart, but he is sentenced to death for his singular moral stand of the movie.
    After being put to death Boris offers a final monologue about what he has learned through the whole dying experience.  The viewer soon learns, that Boris has no more compelling insight into life or death than he did while he was alive.  He leaves the viewer dancing away with Death himself.

This book analyzes Woody Allen as a philosopher and tries to discern his overall message.  This particular chapter analyzes the influence of the great Swedish filmmaker, Ingmar Bergman, on Allen.  The author begins by questioning what the lively, joyful comedies of Allen have in common with the dark, moralistic films of his Swedish counterpart.  The films of Bergman tend to be extremely serious and deal with death and misery, yet Allen cites him as one of his biggest influences.  
    The author begins by exclaiming that they are both filmmakers, as opposed to directors who control all aspects of the film.  Their films largely focus on dialogue, many times infused with philosophical ideas that can unravel the source of a main characters current situation.  The films of both artists focus largely on women and family interactions.  At many points in each of their films, large family meals and gatherings are portrayed that at many times contain a grand showing of family members singing, dancing or playing music.  The films tend to take place in the everyday lives of the characters.  The “normal” days of these characters get caught up in the happenings of mass culture where the main character gets thrown into situations that look more like fantasies as opposed to realistic depictions of the events.
    Love and Death is a film that clearly derives inspiration from Bergman films including The Seventh Seal and Persona.  Boris has an early encounter with Death as an actual character early on in the film as a boy and at the end of the film we see Boris again dancing with Death; both of these are clear references to The Seventh Seal.  Allen also uses many other aspects of Bergman films mentioned above.  There is a large family meal, with eating, singing and dancing.  Boris then finds himself caught in many realistic events (fighting in the war) with fantastic outcomes (being the most inept, cowardly soldier, yet being the only survivor.)

    The book Woody Allen on Woody Allen chronicles the life and filmmaking career of the filmmaker.  He discusses aspects of his life ranging from his childhood, to his anxieties, but he most notably discusses his films and his inspirations.  In the seventh chapter of this book he discusses his film Love and Death with author Stig Bjorkman.  This chapter begins by examining the process for producing the film.  Woody discusses the reasons for shooting the film in various European settings.  He exclaims that the film obviously had to be shot in Europe due to the nature of the script and that many scenes were shot in Hungary because it was much cheaper than being on location in France.  Allen goes on to describe his surprisingly democratic cast selection process.  He claims that he had no preconceived people in mind for any role and that he worked on a veto system with his casting director.
    Allen continues to discuss the more intellectual aspects of the film including composer selection, his various inspirations and his general attitudes on country life versus urban life.  Stravinsky was Allen’s first choice for the film’s score, but he found the music to be too “heavy” which made the film “seem unfunny.”  They decided to switch to Prokofiev which “lightened the whole mood, it was brilliant and gay.”(71)  In regards to his humor style, Allen wants his characters to always be speaking in jokes like Groucho Marx and Bob Hope.  There are purposeful parodies to major films by Bergman and Eisenstein along with a general plot that he claims takes place in the world of Russian literature.  A parody in Allen’s mind, is a work “done out of affection”(72) for an artist.
    This chapter on Love and Death helps the viewer enter the mind of the director.  It enables them to understand the basic processes of producing a film along with the numerous and purposeful places in which Woody Allen finds his inspiration.

 Nilsen, Don L. F. “Humorous Contemporary Jewish-American Authors: An Overview of the Criticism.” MELUS. 21. 4 (Winter, 1996). JSTOR:71-101.

 

    Nilsen’s article demonstrates Woody Allen’s abilities in the area of Jewish-American humor as decided by other authors. The article serves as a discussion of the various takes on Allen’s humor, as a means by which to showcase Allen as a premiere Jewish-American comedian. Generally, the consensus is that Allen’s humor is strong because it pertains to society’s (sometimes troubling realities). While the humor is dark, touching on some sensitive subjects such as genocide, it is philosophical and consistently comments on the nature of today’s world. Nilsen points to one take on Allen’s humor, which describes it as stereotypical at times. If his humor considers stereotypes and cultural differences, then Annie Hall is Allen’s most successful use of humor. Described as a parody comparing and contrasting the lifestyles of Jews and gentiles, Annie Hall is extremely philosophical and provides a strong comparison through the use of inventive, often typically Jewish, jokes. The author providing such insight believes Annie Hall to be Allen’s “most sincere, most personal, and most richly comic statement about both his life and his art.”

    This article, while not solely focusing on Annie Hall, does point to the film as being Allen’s most successful film in terms of his application of Jewish humor, as well as to Allen for being one of the most famous Jewish comedians and directors of our time. Thus, Nilsen confirms the strength of Allen’s humor, particularly as it is found in Annie Hall, as well as the reasons why  Allen’s work successfully translates even today to many types of audiences.

 

 Kamp, David. “Woody Talks.” New York Times on the Web. 18 November 2007. University of Pennsylvania Van Pelt Library, 06 April 2008. <http://movies.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/books/review/Kampt.html?pagewanted=1&sq=annie%20hall&st=nyt&scp=9>

 

    This recent book review of Conversations with Woody Allen from the New York Times mentions Annie Hall, although it does not directly focus on the film. However, it does focus on Woody Allen’s directorial achievements throughout his career, which is pertinent because Allen’s choices in directing Annie Hall allowed it much of its success. Kamp first addresses Allen’s notorious inability to give himself credit, enjoy himself or celebrate his achievements (with another reference to the “anhedonia” title once given to Annie Hall). This omnipresent issue in Allen’s life is also the driving force behind Alvy Singer’s inability to succeed in a romantic relationship with Annie Hall. Kamp mentions how the book succeeds in making light of Allen’s development of his most famous stylistic trademarks on the set of Annie Hall. Ultimately, the review is a slightly negative one, in that the author finds the book to lack drama. He attributes this, though, to the lack of drama in Allen’s life and behavior; Allen’s demeanor does not ever seem to change drastically over the decades of his career. He makes sure to comment on the strong relationship between the author and Allen to highlight why the lack of drama may have been a conscious choice by both men involved. Kamp criticizes the author, Eric Lax, for not being aggressive enough in his approach to interviewing Allen. Kamp does conclude, however, by noting Allen’s continuous ability, through his film and through such things as the interviews included in Lax’s book, to entertain.

      Kamp’s investigation of the book, and his deeper exploration of Woody Allen - the character and the director – confirms Allen’s status in the industry as one of the most influential and well-respected directors of our time. Although it does not particularly consider Annie Hall in relation to Allen’s career, the discussion of Allen alone shows how all films by Allen, including his most successful, Annie Hall, have had a deep impact on the film world and on society in general.

 

Yacowar, Maurice. “Annie Hall.” Loser Take All: The Comic Art of Woody Allen. New York: Continuum Publishing Company, 1991. 171-186.

    In Yacowar’s chapter, similar topics are addressed concerning the functions and success of Annie Hall: Alvy’s inability to enjoy life to the fullest, the contrast between Alvy and Annie’s upbringings and identities, and Woody Allen’s use of narrative and humor. The start of the chapter involves a summary of the film, with mention of some of the key elements which make it such a success. The piece is essentially a description of the main themes of the film, most significantly that of the relationship between art and reality. Yacowar first addresses the reoccurring idea of Alvy’s “sifting the pieces” of his relationship with Annie, which results in the blossoming of Annie and the continued confusion of Alvy. He then suggests that Alvy’s “sifting the pieces” is displayed through freely associated memories and ideas that Allen constructs through his use of narrative. It is argued that the narrative employed is what best expresses Alvy’s inability to balance his desire to confront and avoid troubling memories or issues from throughout life. Thus, this chapter, like other chapters and articles, investigates Alvy’s own investigation of his personality and its problems. Alvy cannot handle Annie’s outgrowing of him because he fell in love with his own creation and then lost it, similar to the Pygmalion myth. The chapter then transitions into a more in-depth exploration of the points of climax in Annie Hall and how they differ according to the two main characters’ experiences and personalities. This description further displays how the two characters, regardless of being in a romantic relationship, are individuals interested in their own personal ambitions and issues, first and foremost. Further dramatizing their differences, Yacowar makes use of the dinner table example, where a split screen shows the differences in each family’s habits at dinnertime, to show how the situation is simply “like oil and water.” Yacowar notes that in order to place more emphasis on contrast, Allen places contrast scenes in parallel spots in the plot. By doing this, Allen suggests Alvy’s narrow interests and his eventual alienation by Annie as a result of their differences, as well as the idea that Alvy can never survive any romantic relationship due to his handling of his personality. Yacowar concludes by delving into the topic of art versus life, transitioning by saying that the parallels of Annie Hall point to the fact that art and life are continuous forces. To him, the primary theme of Annie Hall is that art has the power to compensate for the limitations of life. As this is the primary theme, Alvy Singer employs the art of comedy to make up for the immediate and deeper issues complicating his life, such as his obvious differences from Annie.

    Yacowar correctly pinpoints Alvy’s artistic use of comedy to substitute for solutions to the issues in his life. Similar to Alvy, many people use a particular talent or habit to avoid handling larger issues in life, and thus audience members could relate to Alvy’s habit when the film premiered. Alvy’s use of comedy is so continuous and so unique that it pushed the film to succeed on many levels.

This book takes a more biographical slant to Woody Allen’s work, going through his life and the filming of his movies rather than studying the movies to deduce Allen’s characteristics and real life references.

The prologue to the book describes the scandal with Mia Farrow and Soon-Yi. However, this aspect of the prologue is only useful in its juxtaposition with the description of the overall appeal and greatness of Woody Allen. Meade briefly goes over the benchmarks in Woody Allen’s career, such as his change from stand-up comedy to film, but more importantly, Meade expresses the popularity and the special attributes that make Woody Allen a household name. The biographer discusses the recognizable appearance, the Chaplin references, and the breadth of his film career. Meade lists Allen’s praises as an artist and writer for his originality, independence from the Hollywood establishment, and his intelligence. The writer sees Allen as an auteur, who breathes himself into life in his films through his control over the many stages of filmmaking. In this prologue, Meade stresses that Woody Allen has survived several controversies in his public personal life, and his fans remain with him because of the love of his films and his persona.

The seventh chapter of the book “A Picture about Me” focuses on the Woody Allen’s life during the making of Annie Hall. Allen is quoted as saying that the film was about him in its ideas, thoughts, and background, and despite the title, Meade points out that Annie is not the main character. The film was originally titled “Anhedonia” – the inability to experience pleasure – focusing on Allen’s own perception of life in his forties. In vivid passages, Meade describes the relationship between Allen and Keaton, the writing process, and the input of other film executives, who were particularly against the depressing original title. The chapter describes the postproduction process, the public reaction to the film, the increased focus and building of the Woody Allen persona that resulted from the success, and Allen’s reactions to the attention. This section of the article is particularly different from the other sources, because the depiction of Woody Allen at the time of Annie Hall’s success stands out when compared to the image that the public was painting of Allen at the time.

This introduction is useful for this project, because it describes Allen as a film auteur, who also went beyond his films and became a household name. The chapter establishes how “onscreen Woody” was a creation of the public imagination, dramatizing the differences between the image and Allen's actual feelings and actions.

This book studies the cinematic techniques that Woody Allen employs in his films, and the third chapter, entitled “Getting Serious: The Antimimetic Emblems in Annie Hall,” analyzes the reflexivity in the scenes of Annie Hall.

Bailey argues that Annie Hall is full of antimimetic emblems – “scenes in which realistic cinema rendering is sacrificed to the expression of a different sort of truth” (37). The writer also argues that Allen uses these scenes as a transition from his comedic style to a more dramatic tone in his films. Ironically, Allen blurs the line between reality and imagination through these techniques to reveal the reality of the scenes. Essentially, instead of undercutting the world of the film, these style choices actually draw the audience into further believing the person onscreen, because Alvy/Allen expresses understandable and common sentiments openly, as when Alvy draws out Marshall McLuhan and acknowledges the unrealistic nature of the act along with the universal desire for such a thing to be possible. Bailey credits these emblems and their effects with giving Allen’s films more weight and lasting quality. These elements take Allen’s work beyond that of other filmmakers of comedies, like Mel Brooks, by getting the audience to feel for the comedic character rather than distance themselves so they can comfortably point and laugh. The essay goes on to visually analyze several scenes in Annie Hall where the subjectivity of the Allen’s character comments on or reveals some other truth about the situation, as in the scenes with Annie’s family and brother.

This source is useful for the discussion of Woody Allen and Annie Hall, because just as Woody Allen’s life does, the film plays with and revels in the mixing of reality and fantasy, of the actual events and the imagined. The delicate interplay between audience and fimmaker/actor relies on this personal, stream-of-consciousness technique in filmmaking - also used in autobiographical documentary.  This source allows one to bring Allen’s work to comment on an additional layer of his personal life or, more accurately, on the difficulty of distinguishing between fact and fiction in Allen’s life and Annie Hall.

This book contains several essays about Woody Allen and his work. The second chapter – entitled “Will the Real Little Man Please Stand Up?” – discusses the question of the real Woody Allen versus the onscreen Woody Allen. Pogel argues that more and more critics are treating Woody Allen separately from his creation. Allen even argues that point, and in interviews, he does not appear as the man from the movies. Thus, Pogel pursues that any understanding of Woody Allen based on his films would be incomplete and unconvincing.

Pogel runs through Allen’s private, rigid daily routine, juxtaposing it to the scatter-brained characters that he writes and portrays in his films. The author paints him in the most normal actions and emphasizes the simplicity rather than the exaggerated character associated with Woody Allen. Pogel comments on Woody Allen as a writer, a comedian, a filmmaker, and a businessman drifting away from the everyday man that she initially depicts.

Still, as the chapter continues, Pogel begins to draw similarities between Allen and his “little-man” characters. The discussion at the end of the first section of this chapter comments on Allen’s feelings about politics, being Jewish, and romance, using small references to their infusion into his films. However, Pogel continues to resist the temptation to equate Woody Allen with his onscreen persona. Quotes of Allen’s comments on those subjects are taken from interviews rather than films, although his films do bring up the same opinions to some degree.

The second part of the chapter draws a line between Allen and his characters citing the ambiguities that surround Woody Allen’s personal life, particularly his childhood. The author ponders why Allen would withhold private details, suggesting that Allen may want the audience to consider the broader implications of the film rather than focus on the film as a personal introspection. The chapter goes on to detail Allen’s childhood and written and stand-up comedy career, never mentioning the similarities to his film persona.

This source opposes the idea that the filmmaker Woody Allen is the Woody Allen character in his films, and despite its sound arguments, the essay can also be seen as the extent to which one must avoid the connections between Allen and his onscreen persona to uphold this perspective in this debate.

This collection of essays on Woody Allen contains one particularly relevant essay, entitled “Woody Allen: The Relationship between the Persona and its Author” (Marie-Phoenix Rivet). This essay considers the creation of the persona that Woody Allen wrote for many of his films and portrayed in many of his films. The writer quotes Allen, who describes the emergence of this persona as unintentional and molded by Woody Allen’s physical appearance. Allen’s comedy and his comic persona place him in the ranks with the comic stars of the silent film era, including Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton, and Allen even admits to his persona’s modeling after these past, great, successful characters/filmmakers. The influences of their films are also evident in Allen’s own film gags. The connection between Woody Allen and Charlie Chaplin even reaches to their filmmaking styles, artistic temperaments, the level of control that they possessed over their films, their negative world view, and the split between two fictional characters – one onscreen, one off-screen.

The essay shifts from describing Allen’s film influences to his cultural influences on his persona. His Jewish origins and his contemporary American life identify his character, and although Allen says that his Jewish origins are simply part of his subconscious, the writer argues that Allen manipulates this element of the persona purposely, which is often portrayed negatively in his films.

The third issue that the writer brings up in this essay about the Woody Allen persona is the reflection of Allen’s personal life on his films. Although Allen denies this self-referential aspect of his films, the many resemblances and the creation and portrayal by Woody Allen are difficult for the writer to deny, and the writer emphasizes that a major part of the persona is precisely egotism. Elements of the narrative style, such as the direct address to the camera in Annie Hall, creates the illusion that the writer, director, and actor is the character that he plays. He hires friends; he invokes psychoanalysis, of which he has been under for thirty-five years; and he shares the persona’s ambivalence to fame.

The writer describes the major facets of the persona and then analyzes the audience’s relationship to the persona, describing it as a mixture of identification and rejection. Ultimately, the writer concludes that the persona is so influential and ingrained that audiences continue to seek Woody Allen in them and do so successfully, whether or not the real Woody Allen was actually or meant to be put into the work at all.

This book analyzes Woody Allen’s films based on philosophical theories and trends, and the second chapter is entitled “A Therapeutic Autobiography: Annie Hall (1977).” This chapter is a particularly useful analysis of the scenes in the film that have specific, directed commentaries about Woody Allen’s views on life, love, values, and responsibility.

The beginning of this chapter brings up the important point that Woody Allen rejects the idea that Annie Hall is autobiographical. Allen claims that all his films have a few true facts in them, but presumably that is the limit. Although Lee acknowledges this point, the chapter continues to remark on the continuity within Woody Allen’s film repertoire and refers to Allen’s private life within the commentary on the film and the philosophical ideas. The elements of philosophy are attributed to Woody Allen himself, presumably because he co-wrote the film, but throughout the chapter, the sense that these are part of Woody Allen’s philosophy is always present. Lee even comments on the name “Alvy” sounding much like the beginning of “Allen” with the ending of “Woody” and how Diane Keaton’s real last name is Hall. Lee refers to other Woody Allen films to support the philosophical ideas and explain some offhand comments in these movies. For example, Lee explains Rob’s calling Alvy “Max” by referring to the film Hannah and her Sisters and Woody Allen’s admiration of Ingmar Bergman, who worked frequently with actor Max von Sydow.

The explanation of the chapter's title is made clear in the onset of the chapter as Lee describes the film as a series of psychotherapy sessions, in which Alvy tries to explain all his actions and free him of confusion or guilt.  This idea is linked to the basis of some autobiographical documentaries, according to Jim Lane's book.  This theory is that filmmakers make personal films to attempt to impose order, understanding, and rationality on their lives.

This discussion of Annie Hall describes the film thoroughly, and the continuity that the writer draws between the life of Woody Allen, a philosophy on life that emerges in other Woody Allen films, and the events in Annie Hall supports the argument that the image of film Woody Allen is almost inextricable from the real Woody Allen.

This article presents a biased point of view of Woody Allen’s real life, depicting him as a contradiction, mystery, and possibly even a hypocrite. After succinctly delineating the persona that Woody Allen carries as an intellectual, shy, funny, and neurotic New Yorker, the article gives a detailed account of Woody Allen’s personal everyday life, removed from all of the personality that has stuck to the distinctive image of Woody Allen.

The title of the article, “The Conflicting Life and Art of Woody Allen,” establishes the point of the article: The writer attempts to list and question the many contradictions within Woody Allen’s life. Most of the contradictions come from what Woody Allen says versus what he actually does, such as a purported “disinterest for material wealth” versus the Rolls Royce that Woody Allen uses to go around New York City. The writer bases many impressions of Woody Allen on the film roles, and in some instances, the writer undoes this cinematic persona of Woody Allen with descriptions of his real life. In other instances, the image of Woody Allen says one thing, such as that he chases many women, while Allen makes comments that contradict this idea. However, in the case of women-chasing, Allen’s friend Tony Roberts laughs at Allen’s contradiction of the promiscuous Woody Allen persona. The line between reality and film becomes complicated as the line becomes an intersection between reality, film, AND self-image.

The article oscillates between Allen’s perception, the writer’s perception, and the perception of close friends. The article does not answer the questions about the contradictions in Allen’s life, but rather raises these questions through this new and thorough information and the confusion through the varying opinions and images of Woody Allen. The final statement of the article is made by Tony Roberts, personally describing the enigma of Woody Allen and his ambivalence toward fame and the way that Allen chooses to live. The article simply concludes with the idea that outsiders will never truly know Woody Allen, because he is ultimately the one in control of what people know. This statement harkens back to the ideas that Woody Allen has molded the image and that his life may not actually reflect the onscreen Woody Allen, and that is exactly how he meant it to be. Perhaps, Woody Allen should simply be viewed as a shrewd self-advertisement and manipulator.

This perspective on the issue of fact versus fiction in Woody Allen's life adds to the considerations of the autobiographical quality of Annie Hall, while allowing one to view Annie Hall, as a vehicle for an image through exaggeration and the direct contact with the audience.

This New York Times article - written in 1977 the year of the film’s release - is concerned with Annie Hall, initially title Anhedonia.  The article draws on many quotations from Woody Allen about the film, amassing the information into Woody Allen's take on the film. It is a fairly unbiased, informational article about the film that also comments on the relationship between Woody Allen’s life and the events of the film.

In the beginning of the article, Allen is questioned about the comments that the film is taken directly from Allen’s life, and he denies the claim, saying that only certain details are taken from his life. Allen cites bits of character information that were drawn from reality, such as that he is friends with Tony Roberts, but he also defends his position by picking out some facts that are works of fiction, such as Alvy’s wives. The writer goes even further in depth to support Allen’s claim that the film is basically fiction by telling the story of the house under the roller coaster, which was clearly not Allen's real childhood home but something Allen felt was perfect for the character of Alvy, who is treated as a distinctly separate entity from the filmmaker.  However, at the same time, the writer necessarily admits that Woody Allen initially planned to use his actual hometown of Flatbush for the film.

Also, the writer notes Diane Keaton’s role in the film and in Allen’s life, simply claiming that the relationship on film and in real life are parallels. The article goes on to describe the similarities between Keaton and her character, and the line between the film world and the real world gets even blurrier.  However, as seen in other sources, Allen contests public opinion that the film reflects his life particularly strongly when connections are drawn between Alvy’s and Allen’s relationship to Annie and Keaton. 

Anhedonia, the inability to experience pleasure and the original title of the film, is described as the diagnosis for Alvy Singer, but when asked if it is also Allen’s problem, Allen indirectly answers the question by saying that he believes that everyone suffers from it. The title of the article “Woody Allen Fights Anhedonia” undoes this universality and places Allen as Alvy, just as the end of the article attempts to do by painting Woody Allen’s comedic, real life stories in a cinematic and exaggerated fashion - classic Woody Allen as the public knows him.

This article is particularly relevant, because it harps on the idea that Woody Allen depicts his real life in film.   Though the article does not come to any conclusion on the matter, the writer does a good job of clearly outlining the issue of autobiography versus fiction, wondering what is real and what is not.

This article from The New York Times in 1962 is a first-hand account of Woody Allen before he became a filmmaker. The article advertises Woody Allen as a relatively unknown comedian, who will be performing at The Bitter End in the Village. Woody Allen is journalistically described as a rising comedian, and the majority of the article is about the material that Allen performs, quoting many of his jokes. This melding of article and advertisement illustrates the humble beginnings that are so often noted in his biographies, and in reference to Annie Hall, this article could very well be used to advertise Alvy Singer, the stand-up comedian character that is played by Allen himself in the film.  Similarities between Alvy and Woody as comedian and previous sketch writer can be noted from this account of the real Woody Allen prior to his career in filmmaking.

This article is an interesting piece on Woody Allen, because it perceives Allen as he has been in his films, seeing the real Woody Allen in real life the way another character in his film sees Woody Allen’s characters: Watching his films, the audience member is a fly on the wall, although Allen does use certain techniques to close this gap. However, in this article, Woody Allen is the Alvy Singer character, and the reader is given the chance to see him as if one were in Annie Hall watching his act. The writer comments that Allen draws on his personal life for his stand-up routine, documenting the beginnings of this trend, which will be extended into the several decades of Allen’s films that follow.

This image of Woody Allen from forty years ago is how the persona of Woody Allen stands today. The opening description of Woody Allen’s onstage appearance – the clothes, the posture, the expressions, and the attitude that made him unique – could be a description of the Woody Allen of Annie Hall or the contemporary Woody who continues to make films and haunt his beloved New York City.

Written by the psychologist Dee Burton, this book compiles and analyzes her patients' dreams, which involve Woody Allen. This source describes the many facets of the Woody Allen persona while identifying the place that Woody Allen holds in the minds of his audience and what he has come to symbolize. Woody Allen is perceived as an artist, a friend, a lover, and a quiet thinker that one wants to get to know. The many incarnations of Woody Allen in his films have made him identifiable, relatable, and a moldable image.

Burton points out that Woody Allen’s philosophy on life – on morality, mortality, sexuality, and constant struggles between the self and society – delve into the subjects that people consider everyday on a subconscious level. Woody Allen, known to be an avid fan of psychoanalysis, bled his philosophy and his psychoanalytical tendencies into his films, and as a result, he has become a symbol for openness, genius, and an aspiration toward understanding oneself. As Woody Allen absorbs himself into his films through his roles, writing, and marginally (or not so marginally) autobiographical touches, Allen begins to feel like a friend who one is comfortable with but who one desires to know in even more depth. Some element of his personality – whatever element from whatever personal perception or Woody Allen film – touches his audience members, and the dreams compiled in this book are a testimony to the influence that Woody Allen has had over his audience in a lingering way, particularly through his roles and the illusion of autobiography in his film.

Another interesting fact from this book is that Annie Hall is favorite film among these compiled Woody Allen dreamers, perhaps because Annie Hall is one of his most autobiographical films, where he even addresses the audience with private thoughts and his imaginative portrayals. Still, Burton makes a clear distinction between Woody Allen and Dream Woody. These dreamers have simply identified with the Woody Allen film persona and internalized this identification, which supports the argument that through his films, Woody Allen has created a variation on the auteurist cinema, where he has not only made recognizable films in a recognizable style, but he has also created an onscreen persona that has rendered a lasting offscreen impression.

This project is a collection of sources that discuss the idea of Woody Allen as one of Hollywood's most auteurist of filmmakers, because his films, particularly Annie Hall (1977), are autobiographical, based on his personal philosophy on life, and have a recognizable style. The recognizable Woody Allen style and persona is exemplified in the Academy Award-winning Annie Hall (1977), in which Woody Allen writes, directs, and stars. The sources cover information about autobiographical documentary, whose techniques are used in Allen's films; timely written articles about Woody Allen before and after he became a filmmaker; essays that discuss Allen's career and other similarities between his personal life and films; and writing that discusses both sides of the argument for and against the autobiographical quality of Annie Hall. With all of these sources and the quotes from Woody Allen himself, one must admit the amount of self-reflection Allen uses, but the extent to which film events are impressed upon Allen's private life may be exaggerated. The final sources gauge the reception and reaction to Woody Allen's work - how his persona and style have seeped into the consciousness of his audiences and created an image and brand name (which was created and has endured whether or not one can conclusively say that it is factual) out of the real Woody Allen.

           This article by Marion Meade explores the history and inception of Woody Allen’s Annie Hall.  According to Meade, Annie Hall, which ranked number thirty-one on the American Film Institute’s 1998 list of the best 100 movies ever made, is a self-reflective film based on Woody Allen’s own life, “parading his insecurities, phobias and deep self-deprecation.”  Despite Woody Allen’s financial and cinematic success and his apparent optimism about growing older referenced in a New York Times article from 1975, Woody apparently experienced anhedonia.  Anhedonia is the psychoanalytic term for the inability to experience pleasure.  Coincidentally, Annie Hall was originally titled Anedonia until United Artists, the studio that was backing Allen’s film, forced him to change the title.  The film is a semi-autobiographical account of Allen’s life and, more specifically, his (mostly failed) relationships.
            The premise of the article is that despite the film’s wild and enduring success, the creation of the film was not as smooth as one might think.  In fact, as the title of the article suggests, the film was so problematic that it almost did not get made.  When Ralph Rosenblum, the film’s editor, initially started looking through Allen’s 100,000 feet of footage he stated that it was “‘an untitled and chaotic collection of bits and pieces that
seemed to defy continuity,’ and he held little hope for popular success.”  The biggest obstacle for Rosenblum and Allen was trying to find a linear plot that rescued the film from being a scattered stream of consciousness monologue.  Rosenblum was able to do this by focusing on Alvy Singer’s relationship with Annie Hall, or rather Woody Allen’s relationship with Diane Keaton.  Even though this new focus allowed the studio to change the title to Annie Hall, the film is truly about Alvy Singer and his struggle with himself and his relationships.  Another major obstacle in the promotion of this film was Allen’s aversion to Hollywood and the use of publicity and marketing to promote the film.  Even though Woody Allen was supported by a major studio, his style was much more in line with that of an independent filmmaker than a Hollywood filmmaker.  This article is extremely relevant to history of Annie Hall and has a high level of credibility due to Meade’s use of legitimate sources including editor Ralph Rosenblum, Woody Allen himself, UA executives Eric Pleskow and Gabe Sumner, and her use of direct quotes from the film as evidence to support her arguments.

            In Loser Take All: The Comic Art of Woody Allen, Maurice Yacowar traces Woody Allen’s transformation from a “cult favorite into America’s foremost humorist” (1).  The turning point of this transformation is generally attributed to the success of Annie Hall.  Not only did Annie Hall do phenomenally well at the box office, but it was also nominated for five Oscars and won four, including Best Picture, Best Screenplay, and Best Director, all which could be directly attributed to Woody Allen.  Yacowar asserts that just because comedy is lighthearted in nature, there is an underlying seriousness and significance inherent in humor, especially in the case of Woody Allen, which makes it essential to critically study his films.  While humor can initially seem dismissible due to its comedic and blithe nature, Woody Allen instills such meaning and honesty in his humor that it often holds more meaning than dramatic counterparts.  This humor is apparent in every single one of Allen’s films, although some to a greater degree than others.  Allen is able to consistently convey meaning about serious topics such as loneliness, anxiety, love, and existentialism through his humor.  Allen also explores the relationship between life and art through this humor, and it is through such humor that the viewer is able to define the meaning and implications his work.  Yacowar specifically addresses each of Allen’s individual films and demonstrates how they uniquely use humor to create and communicate deeper meaning.  Due to the chronological structure of the book, Yacowar shows how each film influences and leads to the next film in Woody Allen’s repertoire.  One major issue in Annie Hall is the blurring of reality and fantasy.  Allen makes it difficult to discern to what degree the film is autobiographical and therefore a realistic portrayal of his life and thoughts.  This ambiguity is further compounded by his direct addresses to the audience.  This blurring of the line between reality and fantasy manifests itself multiple times throughout the film, thereby repeatedly challenging the viewer. 

            The second chapter of Sam B. Girgus’s The Films of Woody Allen provides an interesting perspective on one of Allen’s most renowned films, Annie Hall.  Chapter 2, entitled “Desire and Narrativity in Annie Hall,” addresses the relationship between desire and narrative and the role of this relationship in Annie Hall.  Girgus relies on the philosophical and theoretical studies of Roland Barthes and Teresa de Lauretis to express the way in which desire serves as a function of narrativity and therefore asserts that desire and narrativity are inextricably intertwined.  According to this theory, narrativity stems from the Oedipal experience that occurs in the search for one’s identity and sexuality.  The first evidence of this relationship between desire and narrativity in Annie Hall occurs through Woody Allen’s manipulation of time and space, which he achieves by juxtaposing Alvy Singer’s opening speech with multiple scenes that display drastic shifts in temporal order.  This chronological distortion explicitly demonstrates the complex nature of narrativity within this film and its tendency to then process desire.  In addition, Girgus introduces language into the relationship between desire and narrativity.  He argues that this intricate relationship between desire, narrative, and language is exemplified through the humor of Annie Hall, both visually as well as verbally.  Inherent in this analysis of the narrative content of the film is the issue of Allen’s stereotypical and narcissistic narrative desires.  Allen dilutes the potential for negative backlash from such narrative desires by directly confronting his manipulation and use of narrative desire within the film with direct references to Freud and psychoanalysis.  The inclusion of such references creates a unique sense of metacommentary, which contributes to the humor of the film and allows Allen to get away with his use of narrative desire.  The chapter also addresses Allen’s portrayal of the impossible nature of human desire for complete harmony and satisfaction.  This chapter provides a very dense and theoretical analysis of Annie Hall in terms of both content and visual depiction in the context of narrative desire. 

            Annie Hall achieved international acclaim and cemented its place in film history when it won four Oscars in 1978, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actress, and Best Screenplay.  Woody Allen’s masterpiece is often considered one of the funniest movies in the history of American cinema.  The film can be examined on a number of levels, from artistic, theoretical, and historical perspectives.  Cowie looks at the film in terms of its role as both a reflection of and major influence during the 1970s, which served as a critical time for Hollywood and the film industry.  He also looks at the film as an expression of the filmmaker: Woody Allen.  Woody Allen never denies that his role as Alvy Singer is somewhat autobiographical and Cowie uses this to analyze the features of Allen’s life and personality that can be derived from the film.  Woody Allen harbors a sense of mystery and complexity, which makes many of his films, especially Annie Hall, the best insight to his true self.  Cowie researches and analyzes the origins of Annie Hall both in terms of Allen’s motivations that led him to the story as well as the logistical factors that affected the making of the film.  The significance of Allen’s relationship with Diane Keaton as well as his obsession with New York City are evident not only through the content of Annie Hall, but even more so when one looks at the development of the film.  In addition, Cowie observes the artistic and cinematic features of Annie Hall, many of which he argues are derived from Ingmar Bergman as well as from vaudeville traditions of stand-up comedians.  Finally, Cowie addresses the actual content of the film in terms of cultural meaning and its appeal to viewers.  He looks at Allen’s rampant and blatant use of stereotypes and the role of such stereotypes in this film, as well as in many of Allen’s other films.  Cowie argues that despite the use of these potentially offensive stereotypes, Annie Hall manages to maintain a universal and lasting appeal because of Allen’s willingness to reveal his vulnerability and insecurities to the viewer.

            In this critical piece, Philip Kerr argues that in American cinema there is an underlying sense of embarrassment or discomfort with the idea of love, which leads to the inclusion of humor in films that deal directly with love.  Kerr asserts that it is for this reason that the majority of romance films in American cinema in recent years have been romantic comedies.  Kerr cites Annie Hall (1977), When Harry Met Sally (1989), Sleepless in Seattle (1993), While You Were Sleeping (1995), As Good as it Gets (1997), and What Women Want (2000) among examples of these romantic comedies.  He argues that European cinema is not faced with such restrictions and inhibitions and therefore explores love in much more serious tones and treats it with greater respect.  Kerr takes this argument one step further to assert, rather radically, that “outside New York and Los Angeles, Americans don’t feel comfortable with the English language… which is the polite way of saying that outside the big cities, most Americans are plain inarticulate.”  Kerr does not make it clear how he arrives at such a conclusion based on his earlier allegation that Americans are uncomfortable addressing love and romance directly.  He does not provide the reader with definitions of what he means by inarticulate, so it is hard to determine exactly what Kerr is arguing.  There is a definite negative undertone to his critique of American cinema in contrast with European cinema, but he does not provide any reason as to why Americans and Europeans might address love differently, nor does he introduce any ways to remedy the situation.  The problem with Kerr’s argument is that, while he shows an association between the proliferation of romantic comedies and the sense of discomfort with love in American society, he does not provide enough evidence to prove a causal relationship between the two concepts.  This article has minimal relevance to Woody Allen’s Annie Hall, though it does put it in the context of the modern romantic comedy and set it in a group of potential comparable and notable films.  It is important to look at articles such as this one that examine Annie Hall in a much larger context so as not to get caught up only in articles that look specifically at the minute details and underpinnings of the specific film itself.  It is easy to find oneself looking only at character analyses and symbolism within the cinematography of a particular film, which can sometimes cause one to lose sight of the film in the larger context of its role in American cinema and the connotations that its place in film history bring to the film. 

            At first glance, this article appears to be a feminist piece about the representation of women when the narratives of women are told by men.  It is ironic and surprising that the author, Christopher J. Knight, is in fact a man and not a woman.  Knight asserts that representation in any form is inherently biased and subjective.  In addition, Knight explores what happens when, “the narrative that goes by the name of ‘women’ is told largely by men,” which he argues was a common happening until recently.  He quotes Laura Mulvey’s famous response to this question as fact.  Mulvey states, “the woman comes to stand as a ‘signifier for the male other, bound by a symbolic order in which man can live out his fantasies and obsessions through linguistic command, by imposing on the silent image of woman still tied to her place as a bearer of meaning, not maker of meaning.”  At this point in the article, Knight takes an unexpected turn.  One would have expected him to continue to argue that there exists a male-dominated society in which the tendency for men to create and communicate narratives about women constructs women in a male-oriented frame.  Instead, Knight chooses to abandon that argument and reassert the purpose of his article, which is to look at Woody Allen’s Annie Hall in the context of such a framework.  Knight states that he wishes to “address the film in terms of the subtle and not so subtle ways that men impose meaning upon women.”  Despite the obvious element that since Woody Allen wrote and directed the film, the life and image of Annie Hall will inevitably have a man imposing meaning upon a woman, Knight contends that Annie Hall manages to resist this imposition.  Alvy Singer is the one who introduces and tells the viewer Annie’s story, and therefore everything that we know about Annie is told from Alvy’s point of view.  Knight argues, however, that the nature of the narrative and Alvy’s character allows the viewer to “accept Alvy’s representation as less perspectival than normative.”  This article provides a unique critical assessment of the film and, while it is somewhat narrow in scope, it provides insight into Woody Allen’s motivations as a narrator and the relationship between Alvy and Annie.   

            John C. Spurlock writes a comprehensive and astute assessment of David Shumway’s book Modern Love: Romance, Intimacy, and the Marriage Crisis.  Spurlock synthesizes Shumway’s study of modern relationships and the development of romantic love over past few centuries.  Shumway, a professor of English and Literary and Cultural Studies at Carnegie Mellon University, analyzes the transformation of the discourse of romance and the narrative form of romantic love.  He relies on “historical work on the family, sexuality, courtship, and marriage… show[ing] that an important shift in the understanding and uses of romance appears in the late 18^th and early 19^th century.”  He asserts that novels were the main “carriers of romantic discourse” in the 19^th century and that as a shift to the increase of personal expectations from marriage occurred, so did the rate of divorce, which led to the so-called marriage crisis.  Shumway studies the marriage crisis through the frames of intimacy and romance.  Throughout the twentieth century, the discourse of romance, love, marriage, and intimacy continued to change and the idea of love repeatedly reinvented itself.  These shifts in discourse were reflected through the literature and culture of the time.  Advice writers became prevalent and the new connotations of love and romance were depicted in the development of the screwball comedy.  In the way that literature was a carrier of romantic discourse in the late 18^th and 19^th centuries, film also became such a carrier in the 20^th century.  As the marriage crisis became a more serious issue due to the transformation of the idea of modern love and the increasing divorce rate, these advice writers and films that addressed marriage and romance began to play larger roles in society.  Shumway explores the challenges associated with achieving the 20^th century ideal of intimacy by observing popular and timely films such as Annie Hall (1977) and When Harry Met Sally (1989).  These films provide insight into the culturally accepted definitions of such ideals as intimacy, romance, and love, while also revealing the subtexts associated with these ideals.  This article does a remarkable job of synthesizing a convoluted and complex body of literature, but it is still not as sufficient or comprehensive as Shumway’s actual text.  In terms of the article’s relevancy to Woody Allen’s Annie Hall, the article does not address Annie Hall in detail, but it does demonstrate how such a film can both reflect and generate cultural ideals including love, intimacy, and romance, which is arguably the most important role of the film. 

            William Cook’s article from the New Statesman addresses how Woody Allen has caused Europeans to embrace the United States, specifically New York City, through his epitomized portrayal of the city in his films.  The wide reception of Woody Allen’s films in Europe, especially by the French and the British, has turned Allen into a venerated figure in these respective countries.  Cook argues that Allen’s depiction of Manhattan through his films is only an “immaculate illusion” and is therefore deceptive in its portrayal of the landscape.  Cook includes a quote from Allen in which he states, “I constantly run into Europeans whose only sense of New York comes from Manhattan and Annie Hall…If that's what they're expecting to find, I guess they're disappointed.”  Cook does not explicitly reveal whether or not he feels that this is a good or bad concept, but rather just brings it to light to let the reader draw his or her own conclusions.  The essence of this article is Cook’s exploration of what makes Woody Allen’s films so appealing to European viewers, but Cook manages to put it in a larger context by tying in the relationship of the United States with France.

            Cook’s article deals more with the relationship of Woody Allen and his fans in Europe serving as a microcosm for the relationship of the United States and European countries such as France and England than it does with any specifics of the film Annie Hall.  That being said, Cook tackles an interesting perspective regarding the reception of Woody Allen’s films, including that of Annie Hall and focuses on Allen’s portrayal of New York City in the film.  New York City plays a major role in Annie Hall and exploring its significance as the film’s landscape is essential to a comprehensive analysis.  Therefore, while this article is not specifically or directly relevant to Annie Hall, the connotations and implications that this articles holds can be extraordinarily pertinent and vital to an analysis of Annie Hall. 

           Douglas Brode’s updated edition of Woody Allen: his films & career begins with a concise “interpretation of Woody Allen” and then chronicles his career one film at a time from What’s New, Pussycat (1965) to Hannah and Her Sisters (1986).  Brode does not present much analysis or opinion in his description of the different films, but manages to succinctly offer an inclusive recount of the development of each film as well as a summary, though somewhat superficial.  He provides an extended cast and credit list for each film and specifically addresses the roles that many of the key players perform in the motivation and creation of each film.  As per the description of Annie Hall, the text is significantly enhanced by the inclusion of incredibly evocative and telling still photographs from the film.  The description itself addresses the renaming of the film to Annie Hall after United Artists refused to let Woody Allen use his original title of Anhedonia.  Brode also confronts the issue of feminism and the message that Woody Allen is trying to convey about the role of women in relationships through his depiction of the relationship between Annie Hall and Alvy Singer.  Alvy’s narcissistic tendencies and the allegation that Annie Hall glorifies and promotes a narcissistic culture are noted in this section, but never analyzed.  The section on Annie Hall establishes the functionof this particular film within the framework of Allen’s other films.  Brode looks at how Allen’s earlier films such as What’s Up, Tiger Lily (1966), Take the Money and Run (1969), and Bananas (1971) influenced Annie Hall.  Many features of these earlier films can be seen in Annie Hall, but conversely, Allen makes significant strides between these earlier films and Annie Hall, and therefore the film marks major progress in both Allen’s narrative and cinematic form.  Brode also reveals the way in which Allen uses inspiration from Annie Hall in many of his later films.