A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy (1982)

A wacky inventor (Woody Allen) and his wife (Mary Steenburgen) invite two other couples for a weekend party at a romantic summer house in the 1900s countryside.This was the first of thirteen movies that Allen would make starring Mia Farrow, and quite possibly the worst. Farrow was nominated for a Razzie Award, making this the only Allen film to get any such nomination. Indeed, Farrow is terrible here, and it seems bizarre that she is the object of more than one character's affections. Steenburgen, on the other hand, is quite charming and is given an unfortunate role.This is one of Allen's lesser works, and definitely not a financial success. But it is not without its merits. The characters (other than Farrow) are good fun, and there is plenty of that classic intellectual fodder Allen loves to have his characters spout.

Review: I really wasn't that impressed with this movie because I didn't find it that funny or slightly interesting. The concept, which is basically about a group of friends who lust over each other in the wilderness, got a bit tedious after a while and Woody Allen's weak jokes and silly characters didn't have any depth or substance. The fact that everyone is lusting over Mia Farrow, didn't help because I really couldn't see what was so adorable about her. Woody Allen, who plays a mad inventor, was also quite annoying after a while and he just seemed to be running around, setting up rendezvous's with the different characters. The whole look and feel of the movie was quite dated and the storyline goes down some weird avenues that go a bit too far. Disappointing!Round-Up: With only one movie left in this Woody Allen series, I still haven't seen anything that amazing from this accomplished writer/director and I personally think that the movies with Diane Keaton are much better than the Mia Farrow ones. All of his films seem very similar to one another and the concepts, which are usually based around troubled relationships set in New York, aren't that imaginative. Before I got into this filmography, I was hoping to see the mind behind his unique work, but all I have seen is that he is definitely one for the ladies and he loves writing about relationships which are in turmoil, which shadows his own life in his latter years. Because I watched these films back to back, I honestly got fed up with them after a while and his humour is for a certain crowd which I am not part of.Budget: N/A Round-Up: $9millionI recommend this movie to people who are into there Woody Allen movies about a group of friends who get together in the wilderness and end up lusting for each other. 3/10

A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy (1982) A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy (1982) was written and directed by Woody Allen. Allen also stars in his iconic role as a more-or-less decent guy with the ability to say or do the wrong thing in almost any situation. Woody has surrounded himself with talent in this film. Jose Ferrer plays the pompous professor Leopold, and Tony Roberts plays the "fast" doctor Maxwell, who is Allen's best friend. The real clout comes from the female actors: Mia Farrow is Ariel--engaged to Leopold, but maybe in love with Woody, or maybe even with Roberts. Julie Hagerty plays Dulcy, a young but not-so-innocent nurse who has accompanied Maxwell for the weekend. Mary Steenburgen portrays Allen's wife Adrian, who has become frigid for reasons that she knows but we don't.Shakespeare realized the potential of midsummer's night for fantasy and for love, and so did Ingmar Bergman in his film "Smiles of a Summer Night." Allen has never been afraid of taking on a challenge, and he maintains the tradition with a script where almost every man wants almost every woman, and vice-versa. The film is all about love, and all about sex. However, because it's rated PG-13, you know that there won't be any on-screen nudity. Actors talk about sex, they arrange secret meetings and talk about sex some more, but we never see them without multi-layered early-1900's clothing. That's OK--this movie is about the chase, not the consummation.The film contains some beautiful scenery, so it would work marginally better on a large screen, but it was certainly satisfactory on DVD. Incidentally, the soundtrack is composed entirely of music by Felix Mendelssohn. You may not realize that Mendelssohn's incidental music for A Midsummer Night's Dream contains a melody we hear all the time. You'll recognize it instantly.

A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy (1982)As long as you don't mind making light of deception, adultery, and plain old cheating on your wife and lover, this is a really well constructed, fast, brilliantly written film.Woody Allen, by nature, has some combination of striving for depths and avoiding them by silliness that is beguiling. It's really fun to see one of his "entertainments" like this (as opposed to his all out comedies or his more serious films) because it carves out an ingenious, lovable world where you don't have to worry about a thing for an hour and a half. There is surprising humor (of course), sight gags and turns of phrase, and the absurdity of situation. But there is also a layer of despair at the universe, too, which is like pepper in the sugar.Now Allen is a director as much as a writer (both, never forget) and he makes movies fluid, visually tight, and fresh in spirit. And he does this in part because he gets great actors and he gets them to perform at their best. That's part of what a great director does, inspiring and making the most of everyone. Here we have Mia Farrow, who is her usual meek intelligent self, and a counterpart, an echo really, played to perfect pitch by Mary Steenburgen. But even more astonishing really is the arrogant, prolix professor played by Jose Ferrar, who never cracks from his erudite Victorianism. And there is Allen himself, playing the same kind of neurotic, feeling, questioning man he is so good at.So there is nothing her not to like. Toss in the parallels to Shakespeare, an homage to Bergman, and the use of Mendelssohn for music (a switch for Allen), and you have a movie that would stand up to studying. Not that it needs study. It's too slight and frivolous to worry much about, and it gets downright ridiculous (or puerile) at times, so don't worry beyond having fun. For some, it might be too affected, and it might have too many lines that seem obvious, or are played with a kind of falseness when genuine intensity might be welcome. But not really. It's a set piece, a play held flat by celluloid, an overly controlled contrivance, a highly successful resolution of intention. When it's done, you won't be changed, you won't cry, but you'll feel good, and will have a good laugh or two to remember.Years later:I have to admit this movie just clicks with me, and every time I watch it I'm aware it's a completely frivolous, minor effort. But I really like it anyway, and I think it has some sparkling lines, really funny comic comeback and expressions. The movie is also one of the famous set of nearly flawless films shot for Allen by the great cinematographer Gordon Willis.The premise here is simple—three mismatched couples get together for a weekend in the country. (Note here—Allen famously hates the country, and this feels like upstate New York in spirit.) We not only see the quirks in the relationships that exist, we see the attempts at new matches in a kind of grab bag of infidelity. That part of the movie is silly and fun.The other theme here is sort of serious, though in comic clothes. And that's whether there is life after death, or a world of spirits in any way. The answer is Allen's wishful one: yes. But he can only approach it in this kind of fantasy, because in the real world he believes otherwise (from what I read). So this is just a postscript after yet another fun viewing. Short and funny.