Melinda And Melinda 2004

Terry Lawson, Detroit Free Press: It is a stunt, but at least it is a serious one. Read more

Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: Watchable, sporadically amusing and ultimately frustrating, because Allen is capable of so much more, but doesn't appear interested -- or willing -- to push himself any longer. Read more

Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune: Ferrell, Mitchell and Ejiofor are all superfine, but the whole cast acts up admirably. And Allen's writing is as good and sharp as anything he has done recently. Read more

Tom Keogh, Seattle Times: What makes Melinda and Melinda particularly fun -- despite a creakiness in many of the jokes -- is that Allen seems to be thinking about his own penchant for merging comedy with tragedy. Read more

Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper: I think this Woody Allen's best film in maybe fifteen years. Read more

Eleanor Ringel Gillespie, Atlanta Journal-Constitution: It's middle-rung Woody, but compared to such dismal efforts as "Hollywood Ending" and "Anything Else," the movie is a godsend. Read more

Bill Muller, Arizona Republic: At this point, Allen may be the only guy laughing at his jokes. Read more

Wesley Morris, Boston Globe: Allen lately has grown tired of complex characters and inventive actors to play them. He appears to be making movies because that's what he's always done, but the love and the ideas and the zip are essentially gone. Read more

Carina Chocano, Los Angeles Times: It becomes increasingly clear that Allen's idea of otherness is frozen in another era. The dividing line between the in-crowd and the out-crowd is as clear as ever, he just can't see it from where he stands. Read more

Jonathan Rosenbaum, Chicago Reader: I couldn't buy that two supposedly sophisticated theater people could be so simpleminded about what defines comedy and tragedy. I also couldn't believe in most of the characters, including either version of Melinda. Read more

Eric Harrison, Houston Chronicle: The Shawn character says, 'Moments of humor do exist (in life). I exploit them, but in a tragic context.' Allen couldn't have said it better himself. Read more

Paul Clinton (CNN.com), CNN.com: Melinda and Melinda does have its faults, but it's plainly the work of a master filmmaker. Read more

Michael Booth, Denver Post: Overcoming the handicap of an overt, writerly device, Allen crafts a warm comedy and a painful tragedy right before our eyes. Read more

Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: The best reason to see Melinda and Melinda is Radha Mitchell, who has her grabbiest role (or two of them) since she broke through with High Art. Read more

Philip Wuntch, Dallas Morning News: A step in the right direction, yes. A masterpiece, no. Still, it's a big step, one that at least bears comparison with much of Mr. Allen's better work. Read more

Brendan Bernhard, L.A. Weekly: Here the Allen surrogate is Will Ferrell playing a failed actor, all flailing gestures and squinty eyes. Whenever he's onscreen, the film comes alive. Otherwise, not so. Read more

Jan Stuart, Newsday: An invigorating return to the brainy but breezy New York story that reinvents the ways in which stories can be told cinematically. Read more

Ken Tucker, New York Magazine/Vulture: Neither version of Melinda, despite Mitchella(TM)s game try at making them distinctive beyond their different hairdos, is funny or tragic enough to fully engage us; therea(TM)s no opportunity for an audience to be moved. Read more

Stephen Whitty, Newark Star-Ledger: There are plenty of gently amusing lines here ... and many nostalgic pleasures. Read more

Jack Mathews, New York Daily News: Not enough to say [Allen] has returned to form, but enough to remind you of what that form was. Read more

A.O. Scott, New York Times: Melinda and Melinda is perhaps best thought of as an offering to the memories of Ernst Lubitsch and George S. Kaufman, half-forgotten culture heroes whose examples of crisp sophistication deserve to be kept alive for future generations. Read more

Andrew Sarris, New York Observer: A conceptual disaster on Mr. Allen's part. Read more

Rex Reed, New York Observer: A bright, jaunty comedy in a jazz tempo that mirrors two opposing sides of a single personality, dramatized by two different writers with opposite takes on life. Read more

Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel: It's pleasant and challenging enough, in fits and starts, and certainly not the embarrassment of his last few movies. Read more

James Berardinelli, ReelViews: Has a fascinating premise; it's the execution that's sloppy. Read more

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: A movie about the symbiosis of the filmmaker and the audience, who are required to conspire in the creation of an imaginary world. Read more

Stephanie Zacharek, Salon.com: The comic and tragic stories are cleverly intercut, but they're both so inconsequential that it's hard to bring yourself to care which one you're watching. Read more

David Edelstein, Slate: Two lousy movies for the price of one. Read more

Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune: The comic half of the double feature is more wheezy than breezy, and the drama lacks the pulverizing punch of serious art. Read more

Liam Lacey, Globe and Mail: The real drama here is pretentious Woody trying to catch a ride on funny, formerly saleable Woody. Read more

Mike Clark, USA Today: With a grabber performance by Radha Mitchell as both Melindas, this dually plotted exercise is fun to see and even fun to ruminate about. Read more

Deborah Young, Variety: The sensitive dual female role for femme lead Radha Mitchell stirs memories of complex Allen heroines from Annie Hall on down, even if the action is dispersed via a larger ensemble cast which he currently favors. Read more

J. Hoberman, Village Voice: Neither comedy nor tragedy, the movie is closest to genteel soap opera. Read more

Desson Thomson, Washington Post: The details are so complex and interconnected, it becomes more comfortable to let it all wash over you and simply appreciate the passing pleasures. Read more

Stephen Hunter, Washington Post: The tragedy is not particularly tragic except in rote recitation of what came before, the comedy not particularly comic. Read more